ArticleBJGP open2020
'Spending the day with your Family Health Team': rapid ethnography of a patient-centred quality improvement event.
Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient influence on general practice service improvement decision making: a participatory research mixed-methods intervention study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024Article
- Working with patients to improve care.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2020Article
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 at 2 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary care practices have started to explore different methods of engaging with patients to advance quality improvement. This approach leverages the strengths of citizen engagement; however, there has been a lack of empirical research to understand the impact of such an approach from the patient perspective.
aimTo understand how citizen engagement can inform quality improvement in family practice. DESIGN &
settingA single-centre, rapid ethnographic evaluation of a patient engagement event.
methodTen thousand email invitations were sent and posters put up in Family Health Team (FHT) waiting rooms, resulting in 350 patient responses and the purposive recruitment of 36 participants. Observation and key informant interviews were used to collect data. The data corpus was analysed according to ethnographically-informed thematic analysis techniques.
resultsAnalysis of the full set of field notes, patient interviews, and informal conversations with the FHT staff revealed three factors that impacted on the success of the patient engagement event: setting the stage, the power of storytelling, and the value of reframing the patient role.
conclusionThe present study highlights three components of patient and public engagement approaches - the importance of setting the proper stage, storytelling as a tool, and reframing the patient role in healthcare delivery - which may provide useful guidance to those considering similar patient and public engagement events.
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.