ArticleBMJ open2024
How patients and informal caregivers can be trained to effectively contribute to improved quality of healthcare services: action research on the development of the Dutch Patient As a Person Academy.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences of patients and public partners in codesign of Lynch Choices™: an evaluation study using the Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS-22).Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Partners in Care: Training Healthcare Professionals in Using Patient Feedback.The clinical teacher · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPatient and public involvement is regarded as vital in fostering high-quality care. While involvement has clear societal advantages, it is still widely viewed as tokenistic and surrounded by issues of representation. This study aims to understand how patients and informal caregivers can be trained to effectively contribute to improved quality of healthcare services.
designUsing an action research approach, a 15-week training programme for patients and informal caregivers called the Patient As a Person Academy was developed, tested and evaluated in three development cycles. Evaluation methods varied per development cycle and included open-ended questionnaires (N=27) and semistructured interviews (N=35) as well as agile evaluation sessions of all 15 training sessions. SETTING AND
participantsWe purposively sampled patients and informal caregivers who had prior experience in patient and public involvement. Patients and informal caregivers who participated as patient and partner educators in health professions education in the Netherlands could participate.
interventionParticipants followed the Patient As a Person Academy, a 15-week training programme that aims to prepare patients and informal caregivers to become patient partners.
resultsParticipants reported that the Patient As a Person Academy's focus on self-management skills, understanding healthcare professionals' perspectives and communication skills helped them to engage in meaningful dialogue with healthcare professionals as patient partners and made them more confident in their roles. However, tailoring towards individual participants' levels of acceptance of illness and reflexivity was needed. Participants reported that, next to the training programme, peer-to-peer coaching and guidance towards roles in quality improvement initiatives would be necessary to optimise their contributions.
conclusionsInitiatives like the Patient As a Person Academy may alleviate the problems of tokenism in patient and public involvement. However, extensively preparing patients and informal caregivers raises issues around representation.
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.