Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34748689›Full record

ReviewHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022

Pragmatism as a paradigm for patient-oriented research.

Brooke Allemang, Kathleen Sitter, Gina Dimitropoulos

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 118 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
118citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
27.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

118 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 181 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. From Beliefs to Action: Dietitians' Perspectives on Environmental Sustainability and a Pathway to Planetary Health Framework for Food System Change.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Meta-Research on the Science of Lived Experience Engagement in Mental Health and Substance Use Health Research: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

58 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brooke AllemangDepartment of Social Work, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0634-4472
Kathleen SitterDepartment of Social Work, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2479-279X
Gina DimitropoulosDepartment of Social Work, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
University of Calgary · CACentre for Addiction and Mental Health · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMixed methods research studies continue to pervade the field of health care, where pragmatism as a research paradigm and patient-oriented research (POR) as an engagement strategy are combined to strengthen the process and outcomes of the research. Pragmatists use the most appropriate research methods to address issues at hand, where complex social problems need multipronged approaches. As an emerging healthcare research strategy, POR actively engages individuals with lived experience across all stages of the research process. While POR continues to garner attention within mixed-methods research designs, there is a paucity of literature that considers POR in relation to pragmatism.

objectiveAs POR grows in popularity within the field of health care, there is a need to explore the theoretical and epistemological alignment with pragmatism and the implications to research.

methodsTo address this need, we provide a critical review of the literature to examine the synergies between POR and pragmatism, and argue for the adoption of pragmatism as a paradigm for conducting POR. MAIN

resultsThis article begins with a discussion of the philosophical underpinnings informing the pragmatic paradigm. It then identifies key alignments between POR and pragmatism across three intersecting concepts: democratic values, collaborative approaches to problem-solving and the pursuit of social justice. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsReflecting on our experiences engaging with patient partners in a mixed-methods POR study titled READY2Exit, we illustrate the relevance of pragmatism to POR by applying these concepts to practice. Implications and considerations for conducting POR within the pragmatic paradigm are also described. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This paper provides a critical review of the literature and did not directly involve patients or the public. The authors reflected on their experiences collaborating with five young adult patient partners in the READY2Exit study (case exemplar described in this article) to demonstrate the relevance of the pragmatic paradigm to POR. We acknowledge and thank the young adult patient partners for their contributions to the research, for encouraging us to think critically about patient engagement in research, and for sharing their experiences.

Indexed as

Health Services ResearchPatient ParticipationHumansparadigmpatient engagementpatient-oriented researchpragmatic researchpragmatismyouth engagement

Identifiers

PMID34748689
PMCPMC8849373
OpenAlexW3211812388

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.