Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32477591›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2020

Identifying best approaches for engaging patients and family members in health informatics initiatives: a case study of the Group Priority Sort technique.

Brian Lo, Timothy Zhang, Kevin Leung, Rohan Mehta, Craig Kuziemsky, Richard G Booth, Anna Chyjek, Sarah Collins Rossetti, Drew McLean, Elizabeth Borycki and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

14 authors.

Brian Lo1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4 ON Canada.
Timothy Zhang1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4 ON Canada.
Kevin Leung1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4 ON Canada.
Rohan Mehta1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4 ON Canada.
Craig Kuziemsky4Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, 55 Laurier Avenue East, Ottawa, K1N 6N5 ON Canada.
Richard G Booth5Arthur Labatt Family School of Nursing, Western University, 1151 Richmond Street, London, N6A 3K7 ON Canada.
Anna Chyjek1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4 ON Canada.
Sarah Collins Rossetti6Department of Biomedical Informatics and School of Nursing, Columbia University, 622 W. 168th Street, Presbyterian Building 20th Floor, New York, 10032 NY USA.
Drew McLean7McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, L8S 4L8 ON Canada.
Elizabeth Borycki8School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Human & Social Development Building A202, 3800 Finnerty Road (Ring Road), Victoria, V8P 5C2 BC Canada.
David McLay2Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Toronto, M5T 1P8 ON Canada.
Justin NobleCanada Health Infoway, 150 King Street West Suite 1300, Toronto, M5H 1J9 ON Canada.
Shawn Carter10Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, 700 Gordon Street West, Whitby, L1N 5S9 ON Canada.
Gillian Strudwick1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, 1001 Queen Street West, Toronto, M6J 1H4 ON Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient engagement strategies in health service delivery have become more common in recent years. However, many healthcare organizations are challenged in identifying the best methods to engage patients in health information technology (IT) initiatives. Engaging with important stakeholders to identify effective opportunities can inform the development of a resource that addresses this issue and supports organizations in their endeavors. The purpose of this paper is to share our experience and lessons learned from applying a novel consensus-building technique in order to identify key elements for effective patient engagement in health IT initiatives. This will be done through a case study approach.

methodsPatients, family members of patients, health professionals, researchers, students, vendor representatives and individuals who work in health IT roles in health organizations were engaged through a one-day symposium in Toronto, Canada in September, 2018. During the symposium, the Group Priority Sort technique was used to obtain structured feedback from symposium attendees in the context of small group discussions. Descriptive statistics and a content analysis were undertaken to analyze the data collected through the Group Priority Sort as well as participant feedback following the symposium.

resultsA total of 37 participants attended the symposium from a variety of settings and organizations. Using the Group Priority Sort technique, 30 topics were classified by priority to be included in a future resource. Participant feedback pertaining to the symposium and research methods was largely positive. Several areas of improvement, such as clarity of items, were identified from this case study.

conclusionsThe Group Priority Sort technique was an efficient method for obtaining valuable suggestions from a diverse group of stakeholders, including patients and family members. The specific priorities and feedback obtained from the symposium will be incorporated into a resource for healthcare organizations to aid them in engaging patients in health IT initiatives. Additionally, five important considerations were identified when conducting future work with the Group Priority Sort technique and are outlined in this paper.

Indexed as

Group priority sortHealth informaticsHealth information technologyNursing informaticsParticipatory researchPatient engagement

Identifiers

PMID32477591
PMCPMC7236324

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.