Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38840143›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Key ingredients for successful collaboration in health research: perspectives of patient research partners.

Marcia Bruce, Karthika Yogaratnam, Nitya Suryaprakash, Karis L Barker, Deborah A Marshall

Abstract readLetter
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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Marcia BruceDepartment of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Health Research Innovation Centre (HRIC) Building, Room 3C58, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8864-4964
Karthika YogaratnamDepartment of Community Health Science, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2199-2593
Nitya SuryaprakashDepartment of Community Health Science, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8032-9129
Karis L BarkerDepartment of Community Health Science, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3530-566X
Deborah A MarshallDepartment of Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Health Research Innovation Centre (HRIC) Building, Room 3C58, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada. damarsha@ucalgary.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8467-8008

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are increasing publications on meaningful collaboration between researchers and patient research partners (PRPs), but fewer publications of such work from the PRP perspective using an evaluation framework. Our aim is to present our own perspectives and reflections on meaningful collaboration as PRPs working on a qualitative research study. MAIN BODY: We were part of a study team that comprised of PRPs, clinicians and academic researchers, and was led by a PRP. The team designed and conducted a qualitative study aimed at understanding how patients make decisions around tapering of biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. The study was conducted online. The PRP lead was trained in qualitative methodology through a one-year certificate program called Patient and Community Engagement Research offered through the University of Calgary Continuing Education. We had received patient-oriented research training and qualitative research training prior to this project. Team members were assigned tasks by our group lead based on member interests and willingness. Some group members were part of the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research, Inflammation, Microbiome, and Alimentation: Gastro-Intestinal and Neuropsychiatric Effects Network, one of five chronic disease networks in the Strategy for Patient Oriented Research initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. We describe the five key ingredients to successful collaboration based on our experiences and reflections utilizing the Experience-Reflection-Action Cycle as our framework. The five key ingredients that we identified were: inclusiveness, goal and role clarity, multi-level training and capacity building, shared decision making, and a supportive team lead.

conclusionOverall, our experience was positive. With successful collaboration came an increased level of trust, commitment and performance. There is a need for more studies with diverse PRPs in different settings to validate and/or identify additional factors to improve collaboration in patient-oriented research.

Indexed as

Patient engagementPatient experiencesPatient involvementPatient-oriented researchQualitative methodology

Identifiers

PMID38840143
PMCPMC11155161

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.