ReviewResearch involvement and engagement2023
Recognizing patient partner contributions to health research: a systematic review of reported practices.
Review 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 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed.
- Participatory Design of AI-Based Clinical Decision Support Systems: Scoping Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Questions for more insightful and useful analyses of barriers and facilitators to public involvement and engagement in health research: a critical narrative review.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Review
- Compensating patient partners on health research teams: a qualitative descriptive study of barriers, facilitators, and implications for equity, diversity, and inclusion in Canadian patient-oriented research.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Patient experience and expectations with collaborative management between pharmacies and primary care: a qualitative study of a trial (USFarmácia) exit focus group.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Patients as Partners in Perinatal Health Research: A Scoping Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Walking the walk: a case study of partnering with patients in designing and delivering a patient and public involvement implementation plan.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Barriers and solutions for healthcare professionals to involve patients as partners in oncology research: Project RISE.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Giving credit where credit's due - recognition of patient partners in health research.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Aligning awareness, systems and policy to increase equitable access to genomically driven cancer care.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
- Recognition, remuneration and reimbursement of patient and public involvement partners in pragmatic randomised controlled trials. A survey of author practices.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement and engagement in methodology research: process, experiences, and recommendations from the SPIRIT- and CONSORT-Surrogate project.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Contributions and recognition of patient partners in pediatric health research: A rapid scoping review protocol.MethodsX · 2025Article
- The perspectives of people with lived experience, families, and researchers with the manuscript writing process in mental health and substance use research: a qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Ganz Salzburg bewegen [All of Salzburg Moving]: a large-scale public involvement project with underserved groups, for the co-design of local and contextualized physical activity promotion concepts.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Developing and Integrating Digital Sources in an Accessible and Sustainable Online Platform for Adolescents and Young Adult Cancer Survivors: Collaborative Design Approach.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Lessons learned from building the kid's trial with an online children's and parents' research advisory group: a descriptive, qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Consumers' Contribution to Health Research: Australian Research Organisations' Perspectives.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- [A qualitative interview study to streamline integration of patient participation in research].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2025Article
- Supporting consumer engagement in health research about chronic conditions: a scoping review of evidence-based resources.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the Patient Innovation Partner Role: Perceived Benefits, Structures, Supports, and Recommendations for Lived Experience Engagement in Healthcare Innovation Teams.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient engagement in research refers to collaboration between researchers and patients (i.e., individuals with lived experience including informal caregivers) in developing or conducting research. Offering non-financial (e.g., co-authorship, gift) or financial (e.g., honoraria, salary) compensation to patient partners can demonstrate appreciation for patient partner time and effort. However, little is known about how patient partners are currently compensated for their engagement in research. We sought to assess the prevalence of reporting patient partner compensation, specific compensation practices (non-financial and financial) reported, and identify benefits, challenges, barriers and enablers to offering financial compensation.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review of studies citing the Guidance for Reporting the Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP I and II) reporting checklists (October 2021) within Web of Science and Scopus. Studies that engaged patients as research partners were eligible. Two independent reviewers screened full texts and extracted data from included studies using a standardized data abstraction form. Data pertaining to compensation methods (financial and non-financial) and reported barriers and enablers to financially compensating patient partners were extracted. No formal quality assessment was conducted since the aim of the review is to describe the scope of patient partner compensation. Quantitative data were presented descriptively, and qualitative data were thematically analysed.
resultsThe search identified 843 studies of which 316 studies were eligible. Of the 316 studies, 91% (n = 288) reported offering a type of compensation to patient partners. The most common method of non-financial compensation reported was informal acknowledgement on research outputs (65%, n = 206) and co-authorship (49%, n = 156). Seventy-nine studies (25%) reported offering financial compensation (i.e., honoraria, salary), 32 (10%) reported offering no financial compensation, and 205 (65%) studies did not report on financial compensation. Two key barriers were lack of funding to support compensation and absence of institutional policy or guidance. Two frequently reported enablers were considering financial compensation when developing the project budget and adequate project funding.
conclusionsIn a cohort of published studies reporting patient engagement in research, most offered non-financial methods of compensation to patient partners. Researchers may need guidance and support to overcome barriers to offering financial compensation.
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.