ArticleJournal of patient experience2020
Albertans for Health Research Network: Form, Fit, and Function.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Involving consumers in health research through the use of consumer panels: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The patient engagement (PE) platform staff of Alberta Strategy for Patient Oriented Research Support for People and Patient Oriented Research Trials Unit developed a patient-powered PE network called Albertans for Health Research Network (AB4HR); an enhanced tool to better connect patient partners and researchers online. AB4HR was developed in response to an identified need-a user-friendly online forum for both patient partners and researchers to access, so that they can better work together, as partners, in health research. We codesigned AB4HR and identified ways to improve the form, fit, and function of an existing registry through discussion groups with patient partners and researchers. We found 3 main themes derived from the perspective shared by patient partners and researchers. Patient partners and researchers agreed that the existing registry provides a forum to connect with one another in an easy, low-barrier way. However, there were opportunities for improvement with AB4HR, including possibilities for greater interaction between patient partners and researchers to promote more collaborative partnerships.
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.