Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37165922›Full record

ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2023

Good to know - This is PPIE! Development of a training tool for public and patient involvement and engagement in pediatric oncological research.

Liesa Josephine Weiler-Wichtl, Ulrike Leiss, Johannes Gojo, Anita Kienesberger, Rita Hansl, Maximilian Hopfgartner, Carina Schneider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Improving the Accessibility of Consumer Orientation: Co-Designing Infection Control Training for Consumers Partnering With Health Services.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. The Many Faces of Engagement: A Scoping Review of Paediatric Patient and Family Engagement in Clinical Care, Education and Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Evaluating Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement Activity Within the 3DPiPPIn Trial: A Qualitative Exploration of Contributors' Perspectives on Their Impact.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors.

Liesa Josephine Weiler-WichtlDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-2908-8010
Ulrike LeissDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Johannes GojoDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Anita KienesbergerChildhood Cancer International - Europe (CCI-E), Vienna, Austria.
Rita HanslDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Maximilian HopfgartnerDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Carina SchneiderDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Comprehensive Center for Pediatrics and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic and Patient Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) in research is still a poorly understood and infrequently practiced concept, although the literature stresses clear benefits for quality of care and research as well as patient satisfaction and empowerment.

aimThe presently described project aimed at using different PPIE methods to evaluate the current state of knowledge about and attitude toward PPIE in research among different stakeholders of pediatric oncology in Europe. Based on the findings a tailored training tool directed toward the different stakeholders will be designed. METHODS AND

resultsAn interdisciplinary steering group developed a mixed-method 3-stage process to (1) investigate the current knowledge and attitudes about PPIE using a Europe-wide cross-sectional online survey directed toward health care professionals (n = 134) and the patient group (patients, survivors, family members, …) (n = 168). The results were analyzed quantitatively, focusing on group comparisons (t-tests, X

conclusionAlthough HCPs and patients acknowledge the benefit of PPIE, the presented results highlight the lack of awareness about the concept, and the need for effective tools for researchers to integrate PPIE throughout the entire research process, thereby contributing to a sustainable change within the scientific culture.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsPatient ParticipationChildCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeHealth PersonnelHumansintegrated care systempatient advocacypatient and public involvement and engagementpatient-oriented carepediatric oncologysurvivors

Identifiers

PMID37165922
PMCPMC10242658

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.