ArticleThe Permanente journal2022
Engaging Patient Advisory Committees to Inform a Genomic Cancer Risk Study: Lessons for Future Efforts.
Article in The Permanente journal, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Embedding Patient and Public Engagement in a Cancer Project: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Aligning awareness, systems and policy to increase equitable access to genomically driven cancer care.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
- Inconvenient sampling: Community-engaged and restorative justice approaches to genetic counseling student research.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Patient Advisory Groups in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Collaborative Relationship Between Patients and Researchers.Crohn's & colitis 360 · 2025Article
- Engaging communities: A scoping literature review of community-based participatory research in genetics service delivery settings.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Improving Care for Marginalized Populations at Risk for Hereditary Cancer Syndromes: Innovations that Expanded Reach in the CHARM Study.Public health genomics · 2024Article
- Overcoming the exclusion of marginalized caregiver and patient groups in pediatric brain tumor research.Neuro-oncology practice · 2023Article
- Evaluating cancer genetic services in a safety net system: overcoming barriers for a lasting impact beyond the CHARM research project.Journal of community genetics · 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
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction The Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many study seeks to reduce disparities in genomic care. Two patient advisory committees (PACs) were formed, 1 of English speakers and 1 of Spanish speakers, to vet study processes and materials. Stakeholder engagement in research is relatively new, and we know little about how stakeholders view their engagement. We wanted to learn how patient stakeholders viewed the process, to inform future patient engagement efforts. Methods Patients at 2 study sites were invited to serve on 2 PACs. We used an iterative engagement process to solicit and incorporate patient feedback. Much of the PAC feedback on study materials and processes was incorporated. Using surveys and exit interviews, we evaluated stakeholders' experiences as PAC members. Results Nearly all PAC members felt satisfied and included in the study decisions, but surveys and exit interviews suggested the need to improve communications. Discussion Although most believed their feedback was used, and most felt included in study decisions, some said they did not know whether their opinions were used to modify materials or approaches. This suggests the need to explain to patient stakeholders the extent to which their feedback was used and to inform them about the impact that other stakeholders, such as institutional review boards, have on decisions. Conclusion Our evaluation highlights the value of dedicating resources to stakeholder engagement. Although gathering patient feedback on study materials and processes introduced time constraints and complexity to our study, adaptations to materials and processes furthered study goals.
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.