ArticleSystematic reviews2021
Strategies for involving patients and the public in scaling-up initiatives in health and social services: protocol for a scoping review and Delphi survey.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence on Scaling in Health and Social Care: An Umbrella Review.The Milbank quarterly · 2023Pooled it
- Tools for assessing the scalability of innovations in health: a systematic review.Health research policy and systems · 2022Pooled it
- Equitable Patient and Public Involvement Strategies for Scaling Health and Social Care Interventions: A Consensus Study Inspired by Delphi Methods.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Article
- Structural models for spreading and scaling digital health initiatives: A scoping review protocol.PloS one · 2026Article
- Advancing scaling science in health and social care: a scoping review and appraisal of scaling frameworks.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Strategies for involving patients and the public in scaling initiatives in health and social services: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Using social networks to scale up and sustain community-based programmes to improve physical activity and diet in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2023Article
- Article
- A Metagovernance Model of Innovation Networks in the Health and Social Services Using a Neo-Schumpeterian Framework.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Scaling up Business Plans in Tajikistan: a qualitative study of the history, barriers, facilitators and lessons learnt.Global health action · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe scale-up of evidence-based innovations is required to reduce waste and inequities in health and social services (HSS). However, it often tends to be a top-down process initiated by policy makers, and the values of the intended beneficiaries are forgotten. Involving multiple stakeholders including patients and the public in the scaling-up process is thus essential but highly complex. We propose to identify relevant strategies for meaningfully and equitably involving patients and the public in the science and practice of scaling up in HSS.
methodsWe will adapt our overall method from the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Following this, we will perform a two-prong study design (knowledge synthesis and Delphi study) grounded in an integrated knowledge translation approach. This approach involves extensive participation of a network of stakeholders interested in patient and public involvement (PPI) in scaling up and a multidisciplinary steering committee. We will conduct a systematic scoping review following the methodology recommended in the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers Manual. We will use the following eligibility criteria: (1) participants-any stakeholder involved in creating or testing a strategy for PPI; (2) intervention-any PPI strategy proposed for scaling-up initiatives; (3) comparator-no restriction; (4) outcomes: any process or outcome metrics related to PPI; and (5) setting-HSS. We will search electronic databases (e.g., Medline, Web of Science, Sociological Abstract) from inception onwards, hand search relevant websites, screen the reference lists of included records, and consult experts in the field. Two reviewers will independently select and extract eligible studies. We will summarize data quantitatively and qualitatively and report results using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. We will conduct an online Delphi survey to achieve consensus on the relevant strategies for PPI in scaling-up initiatives in HSS. Participants will include stakeholders from low-, middle-, and high-income countries. We anticipate that three rounds will allow an acceptable degree of agreement on research priorities. DISCUSSION: Our findings will advance understanding of how to meaningfully and equitably involve patients and the public in scaling-up initiatives for sustainable HSS. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: We registered this protocol with the Open Science Framework on August 19, 2020 ( https://osf.io/zqpx7/ ).
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.