SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2025
Patient and family engagement interventions in primary care patient safety: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundEngaging patients and families has been promoted as a key strategy for improving patient safety of health systems. However, evidence remains scarce on the effectiveness of this approach in primary care.
aimTo assess the combined effectiveness of primary care interventions in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) promoting patient and family engagement in patient safety. DESIGN AND
settingA systematic review and meta-analysis.
methodThe review followed PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines. Five electronic databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL) were searched from inception to 18 September 2024 with keywords in four blocks (patient and family engagement; patient safety; primary care; randomised controlled trial). Patient and family engagement levels were appraised. Where appropriate, results were combined into meta-analyses.
resultsOf the 19 included records, 12 reported on completed RCTs. Only one intervention integrated patients/families into overall care safety (high engagement); six aimed at enhancing skills and tools (intermediate), and 12 informed patients/families how to engage and prompted them to do it (low). RCTs primarily targeted medication safety, with meta-analyses showing no significant effects on reducing adverse drug events (odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70 to 1.08) or improving medication appropriateness measured categorically (OR 0.92, 95% CI = 0.76 to 1.13) or continuously (mean difference 0.71, 95% CI = -0.10 to 1.52). Overall risk of bias was low and certainty of evidence very low to moderate.
conclusionExisting randomised controlled evidence on patient and family engagement in primary care remains inconclusive and limited in scope. Future interventions should include higher levels of engagement and address more diverse patient safety outcomes relevant for primary care.
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.