Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37029449›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2023

Patients as research partners in preference studies: learnings from IMI-PREFER.

Meredith Y Smith, Rosanne Janssens, A Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno, Irina Cleemput, Mireille Muller, Serena Oliveri, Gwenda Simons, Valentina Strammiello, Isabelle Huys, Marie Falahee

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
10.0field-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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Frameworks Used to Engage Postsecondary Students in Campus Mental Health Research: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Patient and public involvement in the development of the digital tool MyBoT to support communication between young people with a chronic condition and care providers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Advancing Subcutaneous Dosing Regimens for Biotherapeutics: Clinical Strategies for Expedited Market Access.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Meredith Y SmithEvidera, Inc, PPD, a Part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, 6 Plainfield Street, Boston, MA, 02130, USA. tantmieux57@gmail.com.
Rosanne JanssensDepartment of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
A Cecilia Jimenez-MorenoEvidera-PPD, London, UK.
Irina CleemputBelgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE), Brussels, Belgium.
Mireille MullerRegulatory Affairs, Novartis, Basel, Switzerland.
Serena OliveriApplied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, IEO, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Gwenda SimonsRheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Valentina StrammielloEuropean Patients' Forum, Brussels, Belgium.
Isabelle Huys *Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Marie Falahee *Rheumatology Research Group, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
KU Leuven · BEUniversity of Birmingham · GBBelgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE) · BEEuropean Federation of Allergy and Airways Diseases Patients Associations · BEEuropean Institute of Oncology · ITNovartis (Switzerland) · CHUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing recognition of the importance of patient and public stakeholder involvement (PPI) in patient preference research. However, limited evidence exists regarding the impact, barriers and enablers of PPI in preference studies. The Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI)-PREFER project conducted a series of preference case studies which incorporated PPI.

objectiveTo describe: (1) how PPI was operationalized in the PREFER case studies, (2) the impact of PPI, and (3) factors that served to impede and facilitate PPI.

methodsWe reviewed the PREFER final study reports to determine how patient partners were involved. We conducted a thematic framework analysis to characterize the impact of PPI and then administered a questionnaire to the PREFER study leads to identify barriers and facilitators to effective PPI.

resultsEight PREFER case studies involved patients as research partners. Patient partners were involved in activities spanning all phases of the patient preference research process, including in study design, conduct and dissemination. However, the type and degree of patient partner involvement varied considerably. Positive impacts of PPI included improvements in the: (1) quality of the research and research process; (2) patient partner empowerment; (3) study transparency and dissemination of results; (4) research ethics, and (5) trust and respect between the research team and the patient community. Of the 13 barriers identified, the 3 most frequently reported were inadequate resources, insufficient time to fully involve patient partners, and uncertainty regarding how to operationalize the role of 'patient partner. Among the 12 facilitators identified, the two most frequently cited were (1) having a clearly stated purpose for involving patients as research partners; and (2) having multiple patient partners involved in the study.

conclusionPPI had many positive impacts on the PREFER studies. Preference study leads with prior PPI experience reported a greater number of positive impacts than those with no such experience. In light of the numerous barriers identified, multi-faceted implementation strategies should be considered to support adoption, integration and sustainment of PPI within preference research. Additional case studies of patient partner involvement in preference research are needed as well to inform best practices in this area.

Indexed as

Medical product decision-makingPatient and public involvement/engagement (PPI)Patient impactPatient involvementPatient preferencesPatient preference studyPatient research partners

Identifiers

PMID37029449
PMCPMC10080166
OpenAlexW4362700739

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.