ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025
Health researchers' experience collaborating with patient partners: a qualitative study.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2025. 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.
- 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
- Mixed identity is an identity: embracing the people involved in research partnerships.BMJ open · 2025Review
- Co-designing interventions to increase food access: perceptions and experiences of community member end-users.Research involvement and engagement · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-oriented research (POR) and patient engagement (PE) have been increasingly adopted over recent decades, as they generate many positive academic and patient outcomes within various health research fields. While there has been research on the barriers and challenges experienced by patient partners (PPs), we know little about the experiences of the health researchers working with them. It is therefore important to gain a better understanding of the experiences of health researchers who work with PPs to improve their collaboration. This study, which was initiated by PPs themselves, aims to enhance the understanding of health researchers' experiences regarding the challenges of working with PPs.
methodsThis qualitative descriptive study involved 20 semi-structured interviews with researchers from various health science fields, such as primary care and general medicine, public health and health policy, specialized medical fields (i.e. cancerology, endocrinology, psychiatry, gerontology), biomedical engineering and medical technologies, and neuroscience. Participants, including researchers and research coordinators, were recruited through purposive sampling via email, newsletters, and social media, with their participation being voluntary and uncompensated. Thematic analysis was conducted over multiple steps, and the interview transcripts were coded to identify the main themes and subthemes relevant to the study's aims.
resultsThe analysis resulted in six main themes: 1) PP individual and health-related challenges; 2) institutional barriers to PP involvement; 3) challenges in genuine PP involvement; 4) collaboration challenges in research projects; 5) time constraints in research projects; and 6) PP recruitment and representation issues.
conclusionThe findings of this study provide an in-depth view of the challenges experienced by health researchers who have involved PPs in their projects. However, it is important to highlight that this study goes beyond simply identifying challenges. These challenges are often interconnected and complex and influence one another in such a way that controlling for one element may cause further constraints in another. This article provides recommendations regarding current practices, ethics-related questioning, and time-related challenges, which will be useful for the continued meaningful involvement of PPs in research teams and for navigating the challenges.
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.