Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32253919›Full record

ArticleJournal of comparative effectiveness research2020

A proposed framework for patient engagement throughout the broader research enterprise.

Camila L Strassle, Steven D Pearson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Camila L StrassleDepartment of Bioethics, NIH, 10 Center Drive Suite 1C118, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
Steven D PearsonDepartment of Bioethics, NIH, 10 Center Drive Suite 1C118, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient engagement in clinical research refers to the involvement of patients beyond the role of research subject. To date, the goals of patient engagement have not been clearly defined for each stage of the research enterprise, which, when viewed broadly, encompasses stages such as setting research priorities, interpreting and incorporating research results in clinical guidance, and translating study results into insurance coverage policies. This article presents a new framework for patient engagement by first describing the goals of patient engagement at each stage of the research enterprise and then establishing how to prioritize the types of patient expertise that are needed to achieve these goals.

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicPatient ParticipationBiomedical ResearchHumansPatient Outcome Assessmentpatient and public involvementpatient-centered outcomes researchPatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institutepatient engagementpatient perspectives

Identifiers

PMID32253919
PMCPMC7206899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.