Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39482702›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2024

Stroke patient and stakeholder engagement (SPSE): concepts, definitions, models, implementation strategies, indicators, and frameworks-a systematic scoping review.

Hamidreza Khankeh, Gordon Guyatt, Shima Shirozhan, Juliet Roudini, Torsten Rackoll, Ulrich Dirnagl

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Challenges and Facilitators to Patient and Public Involvement In Stroke Research: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    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

6 authors.

Hamidreza KhankehQUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité, Berlin, Germany.
Gordon GuyattDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Shima ShirozhanHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, Social Health Research Institute, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Juliet RoudiniHealth in Emergency and Disaster Research Center, Social Health Research Institute, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Torsten RackollQUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité, Berlin, Germany.
Ulrich DirnaglQUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité, Berlin, Germany. ulrich.dirnagl@bih-charite.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvolving stroke patients in clinical research through patient engagement aims to ensure that studies are patient-centered, and may help ensure they are feasible, ethical, and credible, ultimately leading to enhanced trust and communication between researchers and the patient community. In this study, we have conducted a scoping review to identify existing evidence and gaps in SPSE.

methodsThe five-step approach outlined by Arksey and O'Malley, in conjunction with the Preferred Reporting Items for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, provided the structure for this review. To find relevant articles, we searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases up to February 2024. Additionally, the review team conducted a hand search using Google Scholar, key journals, and references of highly relevant articles. Reviewers screened articles, selecting eligible English-language ones with available full texts, and extracted data from them into a pre-designed table tested by the research team.

resultOf the 1002 articles initially identified, 21 proved eligible. Stakeholder engagement primarily occurred during the design phase of studies and within the studies using qualitative methodologies. Although the engagement of stakeholders in the research process is increasing, practice regarding terminology and principles of implementation remains variable. Researchers have recognized the benefits of stakeholder engagement, but have also faced numerous challenges that often arise during the research process.

conclusionThe current study identifies stakeholder groups and the benefits and challenges researchers face in implementing their engagement. Given existing challenges and limited specific models or frameworks, it is suggested to explore applied recommendations for stakeholder engagement in future studies, that may enhance stakeholder engagement, overcome obstacles, and unify researchers' understanding of engagement and implementation.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationStakeholder ParticipationStrokeHumansCerebrovascular disordersPatient advocacyStakeholder engagementStakeholder participationStroke

Identifiers

PMID39482702
PMCPMC11526530

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.