Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31331334›Full record

ReviewHealth research policy and systems2019

Re-orienting health systems through a commissioning approach: finding solutions for improved consumer engagement.

Karen Gardner, Helen Dickinson, Katie Moon

Abstract readLetterReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health research policy and systems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Operationalising Patient Engagement Through the Alberta Cancer Diagnosis Initiative: Recruitment Strategies for Diverse Populations in Health System Improvement.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Commissioning and co-production in health and care services in the United Kingdom and Ireland: An exploratory literature review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Karen GardnerPublic Service Research Group, University of New South Wales, PO Box 7196, Canberra, BC, 2610, Australia. karen.gardner@unsw.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9783-3575
Helen DickinsonPublic Service Research Group, University of New South Wales, PO Box 7196, Canberra, BC, 2610, Australia.
Katie MoonPublic Service Research Group, University of New South Wales, PO Box 7196, Canberra, BC, 2610, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As many developed health systems grapple with the reorientation of their systems to those that are commissioning led, consumer engagement has emerged as an important theme. Despite many governments asserting the importance of consumer engagement in commissioning, an evidence base is yet to be developed to support this approach. This paper identifies the challenges and gaps in the literature relating to consumer engagement and commissioning, before setting out five potential solutions to these challenges. Ultimately, consumer engagement needs clarity of purpose and any approach should be tailored to context. Effective client involvement needs time and investment. To embark on such a process without this effort can be counterproductive.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationDelivery of Health CareHealth PrioritiesHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansPatient ParticipationQuality of Health CarecommissioningconsultationConsumer engagementnegotiationparticipationprimary healthcarestewardshipstrategic procurement

Identifiers

PMID31331334
PMCPMC6647255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.