ArticleThe patient2021
Utilising Patient and Public Involvement in Stated Preference Research in Health: Learning from the Existing Literature and a Case Study.
Article in The patient, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Attributes Used for Cancer Screening Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.The patient · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Implementing group metacognitive therapy to improve mental health in NHS cardiac rehabilitation: the PATHWAY beacons study of adoption, adherence and data capture.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Engaging Underserved Populations in Health Preference Research: Challenges and Strategies.The patient · 2025Article
- What Service Characteristics Are Important to Patients Treated in Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy Services: Designing a Discrete Choice Experiment.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Article
- Health Care Professionals' Views of Barriers and Facilitators for Implementing a Fall Risk Screening Tool in Clinical and Public Health Settings.Physical therapy · 2025Article
- Making Use of Technology to Improve Stated Preference Studies.The patient · 2024Review
- Preferences for innovations in healthcare delivery models in the Swiss elderly population: a latent class, choice modelling study.European journal of public health · 2024Article
- Developing a person-centered stated preference survey for dementia with Lewy bodies: value of a personal and public involvement process.Frontiers in dementia · 2024Article
- Patients as research partners in preference studies: learnings from IMI-PREFER.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- A framework for implementing Patient and Public Involvement in mental health research: The PATHWAY research programme benchmarked against NIHR standards.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Article
- Discrete choice experiment to investigate preferences for psychological intervention in cardiac rehabilitation.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Evaluating Metacognitive Therapy to Improve Treatment of Anxiety and Depression in Cardiovascular Disease: The NIHR Funded PATHWAY Research Programme.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Review
- Article
- Delivery preferences for psychological intervention in cardiac rehabilitation: a pilot discrete choice experiment.Open heart · 2021Article
- Article
- Systematic Review of Studies Using Conjoint Analysis Techniques to Investigate Patients' Preferences Regarding Osteoarthritis Treatment.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Publications reporting discrete choice experiments of healthcare interventions rarely discuss whether patient and public involvement (PPI) activities have been conducted. This paper presents examples from the existing literature and a detailed case study from the National Institute for Health Research-funded PATHWAY programme that comprehensively included PPI activities at multiple stages of preference research. Reflecting on these examples, as well as the wider PPI literature, we describe the different stages at which it is possible to effectively incorporate PPI across preference research, including the design, recruitment and dissemination of projects. Benefits of PPI activities include gaining practical insights from a wider perspective, which can positively impact experiment design as well as survey materials. Further benefits included advice around recruitment and reaching a greater audience with dissemination activities, amongst others. There are challenges associated with PPI activities; examples include time, cost and outlining expectations. Overall, although we acknowledge practical difficulties associated with PPI, this work highlights that it is possible for preference researchers to implement PPI across preference research. Further research systematically comparing methods related to PPI in preference research and their associated impact on the methods and results of studies would strengthen the literature.
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.