Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38348412›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient experience2024

Co-designing Healthcare Quality Improvement: The Kovacs Burns & George Orientation Guide.

Marian George, Katharina Kovacs Burns

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient experience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Marian GeorgePatient and Family Advisory Committee, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Canada.
Katharina Kovacs BurnsData & Analytics, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6322-0778

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To prepare healthcare organizations and patients/families to be equally ready to become partners in co-designing healthcare policy, practices, and improvements, there is a need to (1) understand how "co-design ready" organizations and their staff and care providers are to co-design health care policies, practices, and improvements with patients and families; (2) understand how prepared patients and families, as users of the health system, are to step into co-designer roles with confidence so that their voices will be heard as they influence the development or changes to improve healthcare system policies, services, practices, and products; (3) anticipate and/or address challenges with meeting the expectations of what is involved with the co-design approach, including with recruiting, preparing, and training care setting leaders, staff/care providers, and patient/family advisors; (4) ensure care settings provided appropriate tools and resources to support co-design; and (5) guide the shift in culture from engagement to co-design. Recommendations for enabling co-design in care settings include providing an orientation and preparation workshop and guide/workbook. An example of an orientation and preparation workshop is shared.

Indexed as

co-designco-design orientationhealthcare improvementpatient/family advisorstransforming healthcare culture

Identifiers

PMID38348412
PMCPMC10860487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.