ArticleBMC rheumatology2022
Patient and public involvement in implementation of evidence-based guidance for musculoskeletal conditions: a scoping review of current advances and gaps.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Amplifying the voices of people with chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) care through photovoice: a case study of patient and public involvement in Klang, Malaysia.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Patient and public involvement in musculoskeletal pain research: using mutual learning to improve research quality.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Review
- Developing a role for patients and the public in the implementation of health and social care research evidence into practice: the PIPER study (Pathways to Implementation for Public Engagement in Research) realist evaluation protocol.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Does osteoarthritis physiotherapy research in South Korea align with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines: a systematic review of English and Korean literature.BMC rheumatology · 2025Article
- The use of patient and public involvement and engagement in the design and conduct of implementation research: a scoping review.Implementation science communications · 2025Review
- Co-development and testing of an extended community pharmacy model of service delivery for managing osteoarthritis: protocol for a sequential, multi-methods study (PharmOA).BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Understanding the lived experience of chronic pain: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative evidence syntheses.British journal of pain · 2023Article
- Patient and public involvement in rheumatic and musculoskeletal research: an idea whose time has firmly come.BMC rheumatology · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in musculoskeletal (MSK) research have been successfully curated into widely endorsed evidence-based recommendations and guidelines. However, there continues to exist significant variations in care and quality of care, and the global health and socio-economic burdens associated with MSK conditions continues to increase. Limited accessibility, and applicability of guideline recommendations have been suggested as contributory factors to less than adequate guideline implementation. Since patient and public involvement (PPI) is being credited with increasing relevance, dissemination and uptake of MSK research, the success of guidelines implementation strategies may also be maximised through increasing opportunities for PPI input. We therefore conducted a scoping review of literature to explore PPI in implementation of evidence-based guidance for MSK conditions. A comprehensive search was used to identify relevant literature in three databases (Medline, Embase, Cinahl) and two large repositories (WHO, G-IN), supplemented by grey literature search. Eligibility was determined with criteria established a priori and narrative synthesis was used to summarise PPI activities, contexts, and impact on implementation of MSK related evidence-based guidance across ten eligible studies (one from a low-and middle-income country LMIC). A prevalence of low-level PPI (mainly consultative activities) was found in the current literature and may partly account for current experiences of significant variations and quality of care for MSK patients. The success of PPI in MSK research may be lessened by the oversight of PPI in implementation. This has implications for both high- and low-resource healthcare systems, especially in LMICs where evidence is limited. Patient and public partnership for mobilising knowledge, maximising guideline uptake, and bridging the research-practice gap particularly in low resource settings remain important and should extend beyond PPI in research and guideline dissemination activities only. This review is a clarion call to stakeholders, and all involved, to transform PPI in MSK research into real world benefits through implementation approaches underpinned by patient and public partnerships. We anticipate that this will enhance and drive quality improvements in MSK care with patients and for patients across health and care settings.
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.