Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38331826›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Co-designing a personalised care plan for patients with rectal cancer: reflections and practical learnings.

Grace Gard, Jo Oakley, Kelsey Serena, Karla Gough, Michael Harold, Katya Gray, Helen Anderson, Judi Byrne, Jo Cockwill, Graeme Down and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors.

Grace GardWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia. grace.gard@mh.org.au.
Jo OakleyWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Kelsey SerenaWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Karla GoughVictorian Comprehensive Cancer Council Alliance, Melbourne, Australia.
Michael HaroldWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Katya GrayWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Helen AndersonWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Judi ByrneWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Jo CockwillWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Graeme DownWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
George KiossoglouWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.
Peter GibbsWalter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, WEHI 1 Royal Parade, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConsumer involvement is considered an essential component of contemporary cancer research, with a movement towards participatory methods, to the benefit of consumers and researchers. Overall, in-depth research on participant experiences and perceptions of their co-designer role-and how these may (or may not) change during a co-design project-is limited. The purpose of this paper was to synthesise the reflective accounts of consumers, project staff, and a researcher who partnered on a project to develop a personalised care plan template, with the aim of generating guidance for others looking to partner with consumers in health and medical research. Here, our team of researchers, project staff, and consumers reflect on the experience of working together using Gibbs' Reflective Cycle, which was completed by team members with responses then undergoing inductive data analysis.

resultsReflections are categorised under three core themes: (1) setting up the group and building relationships (2) measuring the value of consumer involvement, and (3) potential challenges for consumer involvement. Through reflection on our experiences of co-design, our team developed and identified practical strategies that contributed to the success of our partnership. These include setting expectations as a group; having experienced consumers on the team; having regular, pre-scheduled meetings that run to time; and working to overcome challenges identified by the group such as power imbalances, time commitment, and lack of diversity.

conclusionThese practical reflections on creating a safe and supportive environment in which genuine consumer involvement can take place could inform other institutions and researchers looking to work meaningfully with consumers in research.

Indexed as

Cancer researchConsumer involvementResearch design and conduct

Identifiers

PMID38331826
PMCPMC10851461

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.