ArticleJournal of patient-centered research and reviews2017
A Critical Discussion of Patient Engagement in Research.
Article in Journal of patient-centered research and reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- "If the funders said to me that I have to dress in orange, I would dress in orange": findings from qualitative interviews on researchers' experiences of public involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Optimism, ambivalence, and opportunities: staff perspectives signaling a critical turn in patient-oriented research in forensic mental health care settings.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Understanding Patient Perspectives in Treatment and Management of Care in Asthma.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Engaging Red River Métis families in Manitoba in the development of child health resources - findings from a qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Integration of patient-oriented research principles in health institutions: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Community- and Patient-Partner Engagement in Women's Cardiovascular Disease Research: A Rapid Review of the Evidence.CJC open · 2024Review
- Patient Engagement in Health Research: Perspectives from Patient Participants.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Roadmap to engagement: Bringing patient partners into cancer research and beyond.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- The Importance of Patient Engagement to Improve Healthcare Research and Safety.Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare · 2022Article
- Enhancing patient and public contribution in health outcome selection during clinical guideline development: an ethnographic study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Every Story Is Different: Experiences With Body Changes Related to Cancer.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Using a 3 stage process to create a consumer research contact list in a paediatric health setting: the PARTICIPATE project.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Article
- Validating online approaches for rare disease research using latent class mixture modeling.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2021Article
- Real World Survey of Patient Engagement Status in Clinical Research: The First Input from Japan.The patient · 2020Article
- Patient stakeholder engagement in research: A narrative review to describe foundational principles and best practice activities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019Review
- Article
- Patients as research partners; how to value their perceptions, contribution and labor?Citizen science : theory and practice · 2019Article
- Patient and Public Engagement in Integrated Knowledge Translation Research: Are we there yet?Research involvement and engagement · 2019Article
- PPI in research: a reflection from early stage researchers.Research involvement and engagement · 2019Article
- Defining Patient-Oriented Research for the Average Person (and Potential Research Partner).Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients are increasingly expected to take a more involved role in research. Funding for some projects now requires incorporating patients' viewpoints or involvement in research processes. While intended to achieve commendable goals, it is important to critically assess the means used to achieve these aims. Presently, there may be issues of valuing only certain epistemologies, failing to evaluate existing programs and their impacts, marginalizing less "engaged" patients, and promoting only tokenism. These are areas that require exploration and reflection before assuming that patient engagement approaches are sufficient or the only means of incorporating patient perspectives into research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.