ArticleThe British journal of occupational therapy2024
Public and professional involvement in a systematic review investigating the impact of occupational therapy on the self-management of rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in The British journal of occupational therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methods of Engaging Interest-Holders in Healthcare Evidence Syntheses: A Scoping Review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2026Review
- Targeting everyday decision makers in research: early career researcher and patient and public involvement and engagement collaboration in an AI-in-healthcare project.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- The Impact of Occupational Therapy on the Self-Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Mixed Methods Systematic Review.ACR open rheumatology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Public and health professional involvement (PHPI) is essential in healthcare research yet uncommonly integrated into systematic reviews. We incorporated and evaluated PHPI in a mixed methods review of occupational therapy for self-management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods: Public partners were living with or caring for someone with RA. Our steering group comprised two public, two professionals (one occupational therapist, one rheumatologist), and one reviewer who planned the review's PHPI (August 2021). Involvement was evaluated from public and health professional (PHP) perspectives using a survey and workshops (August-October 2022) exploring reasons for involvement, challenges and learning opportunities. Results: Alongside the steering group, 16 public and 6 professionals were involved throughout the review. Five public refined the search strategy, with three assisting in subsequent review activities. PHPs helped interpret findings during three public ( Conclusions: PHPI is worthwhile, feasible and can be integrated within a systematic review. PHP partners considered participation valuable; researchers must prioritise time to prepare and communicate PHPI activities.
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.