ArticleClinical obstetrics and gynecology2022
What Matters to Whom: Patient and Public Involvement in Research.
Article in Clinical obstetrics and gynecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Expanding Role of Gene Sequencing in Shaping Fetal Therapies: Clinical and Ethical Considerations.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Review
- Making space to listen: engaging people with a chronic condition and various health literacy levels as citizen researchers.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Interactions between self-help and hospice and palliative care - Opportunities, barriers and needs (Self-Pall): A study protocol.PloS one · 2026Article
- Citizen science in osteoarthritis research: a scoping review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Accessible Patient Education Materials for Low Back Pain Rarely Meet People's Information Needs: A Scoping Review.Musculoskeletal care · 2025Article
- Co-producing a randomized controlled trial on the frequency of bathing in eczema: description of a citizen science approach.Skin health and disease · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement in abortion research: reflections from the Shaping Abortion for Change (SACHA) Study.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2024Article
- Co-producing principles to guide health research: an illustrative case study from an eating disorder research clinic.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We outline a call to action for reproductive health researchers to include patient and public involvement (PPI) in research. PPI prioritizes the patient perspective from study design through dissemination of results which centers the people research intends to serve. PPI highlights the patient as an expert in their own condition. PPI that includes groups harmed by health care disparities can draw attention to these harms and generate novel approaches to address them. Numerous frameworks exist for the use of PPI in research. Because obstetrics and gynecology conditions can be particularly sensitive, PPI is crucial in our field.
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.