ArticleBMJ open2020
Patients, clinicians and researchers working together to improve cardiovascular health: a qualitative study of barriers and priorities for patient-oriented research.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Influencing the Uptake of Digital Health Interventions for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Among Healthcare Providers: A Systematic Review.Global heart · 2026Pooled it
- Co-creating community support strategies for chronic disease management: insights from our experience with two community groups in southern Quito, Ecuador.Health promotion international · 2026Article
- A critical reflective analysis of patient and public involvement in a programme of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction research.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Involving consumers in health research through the use of consumer panels: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Health researchers' experience collaborating with patient partners: a qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Individualized Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures As a Communication Aid in Outpatient Cardiology Care: A Study Protocol.CJC open · 2025Article
- Codesigning person-centred quality indicators with diverse communities: A qualitative patient engagement study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Patient Experience After Risk Stratification and Follow-up for Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Catheterization: Patient Survey.CJC open · 2021Article
- Patient-led use of patient-reported outcome measure in self-Management of a Rotator Cuff Injury.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2021Article
- Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Using Statins: A Qualitative Study With Patients and Family Physicians.CJC open · 2020Article
- Optimizing Patient-Reported Experiences for Cardiovascular Disease: Current Landscape and Future Opportunities.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journalReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe overall goal of this study is to identify priorities for cardiovascular (CV) health research that are important to patients and clinician-researchers. We brought together a group of CV patients and clinician-researchers new to patient-oriented research (POR), to build a multidisciplinary POR team and form an advisory committee for the Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta.
designThis qualitative POR used a participatory health research paradigm to work with participants in eliciting their priorities. Therefore, participants were involved in priority setting, and analysis of findings. Participants also developed a plan for continued engagement to support POR in CV health research.
settingLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Canada.
participantsA total of 23 participants, including patients and family caregivers (n=12) and clinician-researchers (n=11).
resultsParticipants identified barriers and facilitators to POR in CV health (lack of awareness of POR and poor understanding on the role of patients) and 10 research priorities for improving CV health. The CV health research priorities include: (1) CV disease prediction and prevention, (2) access to CV care, (3) communication with providers, (4) use of eHealth technology, (5) patient experiences in healthcare, (6) patient engagement, (7) transitions and continuity of CV care, (8) integrated CV care, (9) development of structures for patient-to-patient support and (10) research on rare heart diseases.
conclusionsIn this study, research priorities were identified by patients and clinician-researchers working together to improve CV health. Future research programme and projects will be developed to address these priorities. A key output of this study is the creation of the patient advisory council that will provide support and will work with clinician-researchers to improve CV health.
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.