Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35349028›Full record

ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2022

Evaluating the Impacts of Patient Engagement on Health Services Research Teams: Lessons from the Veteran Consulting Network.

Vanessa L Merker, Justeen K Hyde, Abigail Herbst, Amanda K Solch, David C Mohr, Lauren Gaj, Kelly Dvorin, Eileen M Dryden

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Incorporating Patient Input into the Target Product Profile.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Patient engagement in health implementation research: A logic model.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Leveraging the timing and frequency of patient decision aids in longitudinal shared decision-making: A narrative review and applied model.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Vanessa L MerkerCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA. vmerker@mgh.harvard.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-4542-5227
Justeen K HydeCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
Abigail HerbstCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
Amanda K SolchCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
David C MohrCenter of Helathcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, USA.
Lauren GajCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
Kelly DvorinCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
Eileen M DrydenCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research (CHOIR), VA Bedford Healthcare System, Bedford, MA, USA.
VA New England Healthcare System · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USVA Boston Healthcare System · US

Funding

Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (US) Locally Initiated Project #19-004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite increasing commitment to patient engagement in research, evaluation of the impact of these efforts on research processes, products, and teams is limited.

objectiveTo explore the impacts of engaging patients as consultants to research studies by examining the experiences, impacts, and lessons learned from a program facilitating patient engagement at a Veterans Health Administration research center.

designWe developed a logic model to articulate the activities being implemented to support patient engagement and their anticipated outcomes. Then, we conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with participants in the local Veteran Consulting Network to qualitatively explore these outcomes.

participantsTwelve researchers and eleven Veteran patients with experience working on at least one grant or funded study. APPROACH: Interview transcripts were inductively coded using a consensus-based approach. Findings were synthesized using framework analysis and mapped back onto our logic model of expected patient engagement impacts. KEY

resultsPatient engagement improved the perceived quality and relevance of research studies as patient consultants challenged researchers' assumptions about patient populations and clinical contexts and gave feedback that helped improve the feasibility of proposed grants, readability of study materials, comprehensiveness of study assessments, and cultural sensitivity and relevance of interventions. Patient engagement also had personal benefits to researchers and patients. Researchers reported improved communication skills and higher job satisfaction. Patients reported a sense of purpose and satisfaction from their work with greater awareness of and appreciation for research.

conclusionsEngaging patients in research can have multiple benefits to the people and work involved. Our evaluation process can serve as a template for other organizations to plan for and assess the impact of their own patient engagement programs. Creating logic models and updating them based on feedback from program users make engagement goals explicit, help verify expected mechanisms to achieve impact, and facilitate organizational learning.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationVeteransHealth Services ResearchHumansJob SatisfactionReferral and Consultationhealth services researchprogram evaluationqualitative researchstakeholder engagementveterans

Identifiers

PMID35349028
PMCPMC8993982
OpenAlexW4221072379

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.