ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021
Understanding multi-stakeholder needs, preferences and expectations to define effective practices and processes of patient engagement in medicine development: A mixed-methods study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Health Technologies: Learnings and Perspectives From a Patient Engagement Stakeholder Expectations Matrix Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Results of a patient engagement training for health advisors: a study of self-perceived competency enhancements.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Implementing Personalized Cancer Medicine: Insights from a Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Measuring and Demonstrating the Value of Patient Engagement Across the Medicines Lifecycle: A Patient Engagement Impact Measurement Framework.The patient · 2025Article
- Development, Validity, and Reliability of Three Instruments to Assess Holistic Care from Different Perspectives.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Health service provider views on measuring patient involvement in healthcare: an interview study with researchers, clinicians, service managers, and policymakers.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Exploring the patient perspective in pulmonary hypertension.The European respiratory journal · 2024Article
- How can health technology assessment be improved to optimise access to medicines? Results from a Delphi study in Europe : Better access to medicines through HTA.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Article
- Patient engagement in clinical trial design for rare neuromuscular disorders: impact on the DELIVER and ACHIEVE clinical trials.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- From Innovator Result-driven to Multi-actor Impact-oriented Public-Private Partnerships: Integrating the Patient Perspective.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2024Review
- Partnering with patients and caregivers to enrich research and care in kidney disease: values and strategies.Clinical kidney journal · 2023Review
- Using Patient Perspectives to Inform Better Clinical Trial Design and Conduct: Current Trends and Future Directions.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2023Review
- Roadmap to engagement: Bringing patient partners into cancer research and beyond.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Practices of patient engagement in drug development: a systematic scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2022Article
- Understanding multi-stakeholder needs, preferences and expectations to define effective practices and processes of patient engagement in medicine development: A mixed-methods study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe holistic evolution of patient engagement in medicines development requires a more detailed understanding of the needs of all involved stakeholders, and one that better accounts for the specific needs of some potentially vulnerable patient populations and key stages in medicines development.
objectiveThe purpose of this convergent mixed-methods study was to better understand the needs of different stakeholders concerning patient engagement at three key stages in medicines development: research priority setting, clinical trial design and early dialogues with Health Technology Assessment bodies and regulators.
designThis study brought together findings from three sources: i) an online questionnaire, ii) face-to-face consultations with two potentially vulnerable patient populations, a workshop with Health Technology Assessment bodies, and iii) three-step modified Delphi methodology.
resultsOverall stakeholders still need additional varied support mechanisms to undertake, sustain or measure value of patient engagement. Health Technology Assessment bodies need better rationale for patient engagement in early dialogue and tools to support its implementation. Improved awareness and understanding of the need and value that involving patients, who are often considered as potentially vulnerable, can bring is needed, as is better accommodation of their specific needs. Similarly, weighted Delphi categories were as follows: aims and objectives, and sustainability. Several additional themes were common across the three key stages in medicines development.
conclusionThis broad-reaching study provides the blocks needed to build a framework for patient engagement in medicines development. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were involved in review and interpretation of data.
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.