ArticleThe patient2024
Studying How Patient Engagement Influences Research: A Mixed Methods Study.
Article in The patient, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Creating shared vision in patient partnered research: a case example of patient engagement from the PAVE project (producing an arthritis value framework with economic evidence: paving the way for rare childhood disease).Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Exploring Stakeholder Involvement in Intervention Implementation Studies: Systematic Evidence Synthesis With an Evidence Gap Map Approach.Evaluation & the health professions · 2026Review
- Patients as Partners in Sickle Cell Disease Research in Africa: A Framework for Equitable Patient-Engaged Health Research.The patient · 2026Article
- Research on the impact of hospital organizational behavior on physicians'patient-centered care.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Reflections on youth partnership in a randomized controlled trial of an intervention to optimize transition from pediatric to adult care in inflammatory bowel disease.Health care transitions · 2025Article
- Establishing patient partners' roles on research teams: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- A matrix tool to foster patient engagement in children, adolescents and young adults: report from a multistakeholder workshop.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Preferences and Willingness-to-Pay for Oral Antidiabetic Drugs Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2024Article
- Key ingredients for successful collaboration in health research: perspectives of patient research partners.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is evidence supporting the value of patient engagement (PE) in research to patients and researchers. However, there is little research evidence on the influence of PE throughout the entire research process as well as the outcomes of research engagement. The purpose of our study is to add to this evidence.
methodsWe used a convergent mixed method design to guide the integration of our survey data and observation data to assess the influence of PE in two groups, comprising patient research partners (PRPs), clinicians, and researchers. A PRP led one group (PLG) and an academic researcher led the other (RLG). Both groups were given the same research question and tasked to design and conduct an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-related patient preference study. We administered validated evaluation tools at three points and observed PE in the two groups conducting the IBD study.
resultsPRPs in both groups took on many operational roles and influenced all stages of the IBD-related qualitative study: launch, design, implementation, and knowledge translation. PRPs provided more clarity on the study design, target population, inclusion-exclusion criteria, data collection approach, and the results. PRPs helped operationalize the project question, develop study material and data collection instruments, collect data, and present the data in a relevant and understandable manner to the patient community. The synergy of collaborative partnership resulted in two projects that were patient-centered, meaningful, understandable, legitimate, rigorous, adaptable, feasible, ethical and transparent, timely, and sustainable.
conclusionCollaborative and meaningful engagement of patients and researchers can influence all stages of qualitative research including design and approach, and outputs.
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.