ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Measurable outcomes of consumer engagement in health research: A scoping review.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Embedding Consumer-Led Research in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre Alliance: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Enablers to successful patient and public involvement in Palliative Care Research: Qualitative perspectives of public members and Program Coordinators.Palliative medicine · 2026Article
- Co-designing primary and secondary outcome measures for an international phase 3 trial of surgical de-escalation in vulvar cancer through a consumer workshop.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Co-Design of a Framework for Person-Centred Care at Emergency Department Triage and Waiting Room.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Consumer and community involvement in paediatric intensive care research across Australia and New Zealand: a protocol for a mixed-methods environmental scan.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Supporting consumer engagement in health research about chronic conditions: a scoping review of evidence-based resources.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Consumer perspective on breast density notification in Australia.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Article
- Consumer Involvement in the Design and Development of Medication Safety Interventions or Services in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Engaging With Health Consumers in Scientific Conferences-As Partners not Bystanders.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Exploring Consumers' Motivations and Experiences of Engaging as Partners in Cancer Research.The patient · 2024Article
- Development of a consumer involvement strategy for a small university-based musculoskeletal research centre.Musculoskeletal care · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Consumer engagement is increasingly recognized as an instrumental component of health research, with many institutions and international bodies mandating it as part of the research and funding process. Given an increasing utilization of consumer engagement in health research, it is critical to identify the literature which support its value and tools that capture successful outcomes. To develop an overview of the literature, we conducted an umbrella scoping review exploring important outcomes of consumer engagement in health research combined with a scoping review of relevant frameworks. Specifically, we aimed to capture outcomes which reflect authentic and meaningful consumer engagement. Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library) were searched using key search terms. Records were included if they were review articles or frameworks that addressed outcomes of consumer engagement in health research. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and an inductive qualitative content analysis. Identified outcomes were sorted based on the three most relevant stakeholder groups (consumer, researcher, institution). Results: A total of twenty articles that explored a variety of health disciplines were included. We identified fifteen measurable outcomes of consumer engagement in health research. Eight core outcomes were relevant to all stakeholder groups, and were considered fundamental to authentic consumer engagement including (1) trust, (2) empowerment, (3) respect, (4) confidence in the outcomes of the research, (5) transparency of the research process, (6) satisfaction with the consumer engagement program, (7) knowledge and experiences of consumers, and (8) degree of consumer engagement. Outcomes pertaining to specific stakeholder groups included representativeness and diversity of the consumer groups, research relevance to consumers, funding opportunities, quality/validity of the research, recruitment/retention rates, translation and dissemination of research, and interpretation of results. Conclusion: This review identified key measurable outcomes that could be captured when evaluating the impacts of consumer engagement on health research and the success of consumer engagement programs. All outcomes identified were relatively underexplored within the literature, and inadequately and/or inconsistently evaluated amongst studies. Future research should consult all stakeholder groups to identify outcomes perceived to be reflective of optimal consumer engagement.
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.