ArticleBMC medical research methodology2024
Is this really Empowerment? Enhancing our understanding of empowerment in patient and public involvement within clinical research.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking Empowerment in Healthcare: A Dynamic Continuum.Nursing inquiry · 2026Article
- Empowering communities, educating researchers: reflections on researcher training through the 'Be the Voice of Your Community' Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) event.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- What added value does Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in oncology research bring to cancer patients and what are the challenges in realizing it? A mixed-methods cross-sectional study in four PPI groups in Flanders (Belgium).Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Article
- Patient- and Public-Led Research - How Is It Defined and Practiced: A Scoping Review.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Inclusive methodological awareness for equity and diversity in biomedical research.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- User experiences with a mobile health app for self-management of diabetes and hypertension in Ghana: a qualitative study.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Active involvement of children aged 11-12 years in the development of a healthy nutrition intervention - a qualitative evaluation from researchers' and children's perspectives.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The role of public and patient involvement in designing a web-based, physical activity application for individuals with severe mental illness.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Measuring impacts of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE): a narrative review synthesis of review evidence.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- How Can We Enhance Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in Nursing Science?Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Meaningful public involvement: changing research institutions toward epistemic justice.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- From inclusion to empowerment: advancing equity through co-research with people living with dementia.Frontiers in dementia · 2025Article
- The Psychological Journey of Patients with Atrophic Acne Scarring: A Qualitative Study Based on Uncertainty in Illness Theory.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere has been a growing push to involve patients in clinical research, shifting from conducting research on, about, or for them to conducting it with them. Two arguments advocate for this approach, known as Patient and Public Involvement (PPI): to improve research quality, appropriateness, relevance, and credibility by including patients' diverse perspectives, and to use PPI to empower patients and democratize research for more equity in research and healthcare. However, while empowerment is a core objective, it is often not clear what is meant by empowerment in the context of PPI in clinical research. This vacancy can lead to insecurities for both patients and researchers and a disconnect between the rhetoric of empowerment in PPI and the reality of its practice in clinical trials. Thus, clarifying the understanding of empowerment within PPI in clinical research is essential to ensure that involvement does not become tokenistic and depletes patients' capacity to advocate for their rights and needs.
methodsWe explored the historical roots of empowerment, primarily emerging from mid-20th century social movements like feminism and civil rights and reflected the conceptual roots of empowerment from diverse fields to better understand the (potential) role of empowerment in PPI in clinical research including its possibilities and limitations.
resultsCommon themes of empowerment in PPI and other fields are participation, challenging power structures, valuing diverse perspectives, and promoting collaboration. On the other hand, themes such as contextual differences in the empowerment objectives, the relationship between empowerment and scientific demands, research expertise, and power asymmetries mark a clear distinction from empowerment in other fields.
conclusionPPI offers potential for patient empowerment in clinical trials, even when its primary goal may be research quality. Elements like participation, sharing opinions, and active engagement can contribute to patient empowerment. Nonetheless, some expectations tied to empowerment might not be met within the constraints of clinical research. To empower patients, stakeholders must be explicit about what empowerment means in their research, engage in transparent communication about its realistic scope, and continuously reflect on how empowerment can be fostered and sustained within the research process.
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.