Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39261814›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Motivation for patient engagement in patient safety: a multi-perspective, explorative survey.

Caroline Raab, Nikoloz Gambashidze, Larissa Brust, Matthias Weigl, Amelie Koch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Promoting Patient Safety Through Patient Engagement at the Organisational Level: A Delphi-Based Needs Assessment Among Patient and Family Advisory Councils.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Patient safety-development and evaluation].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Caroline RaabInstitute for Patient Safety (IfPS), University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Nikoloz GambashidzeInstitute for Patient Safety (IfPS), University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8113-0963
Larissa BrustInstitute for Patient Safety (IfPS), University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-6290-8512
Matthias WeiglInstitute for Patient Safety (IfPS), University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany. matthias.weigl@ukbonn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2408-1725
Amelie KochInstitute for Patient Safety (IfPS), University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4389-2868

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesDespite increasing calls for more patient engagement in patient safety, limited knowledge remains on what actually motivates key stakeholders in healthcare to promote patient engagement. We therefore set out to survey key stakeholders of patient engagement in patient safety (i.e., patients, healthcare professionals, and managers). We aimed to identify and explore stakeholder's distinct and shared motives for patient engagement.

methodsA stepwise Delphi method was applied, utilizing semi-structured online interviews for determination of stakeholder motives for patient engagement in patient safety. In a subsequent online survey, statements were evaluated and identified. 34 subject-matter experts from all relevant stakeholder groups completed the online interviews and 33 the online survey. We used content analysis approaches for qualitative and descriptive analyses for quantitative measures. Further, we evaluated the consensus on distinct and shared motives across stakeholder groups.

resultsSeven key motives for patient engagement in patient safety were identified. Major motives attributed to patients were: (1) To improve experiences and care outcomes for oneself, as well as (2) for future patients, (3) to express gratitude and appreciation, (4) to cope successfully with treatment-related emotions. A motive shared by patients and professionals was (5) to contribute actively to improved delivery of healthcare. To optimize patient safety, costs, and care processes (6) was shared by professionals and managers. Lastly, (7) to improve patient-provider relationships was jointly shared by all stakeholder groups. For four motives (1, 2, 6, 7) consensus was established.

conclusionsIn order to unlock the full potential of future interventions in patient engagement, a deeper understanding of stakeholder motives is essential. We identified a set of distinct and shared motives for patient engagement across relevant stakeholder groups. Our findings may inform future interventions in patient engagement that take account of the motivational foundations and aspirations of all stakeholders who are key for the success for collaborative patient safety and care improvements.

trial registrationID DRKS00031837 (Date May 8, 2023).

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueMotivationPatient ParticipationPatient SafetyAdultFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchStakeholder ParticipationSurveys and QuestionnairesHealthcareMotivationPatient engagementPatient safetyQualitative analysisStakeholderSurvey

Identifiers

PMID39261814
PMCPMC11391733

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.