ArticleProgress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action2025
Lessons Learned from a Parkinson's Research Patient Advisory Board Model with Academic Centers.
Article in Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is minimal comparative effectiveness research (CER) in Parkinson's disease (PD). Engaging people with PD in the research process through patient advisory boards (PAB) is one way to address this gap.
objectivesTo describe the project model and lessons learned from a PAB pilot project in five Parkinson's Foundation Centers of Excellence in CER.
methodsA virtual training and toolkit on patient engagement, PABs and CER was created and used to implement PABs. Satisfaction and impact of the PAB training and pilot model was assessed via surveys.Results and Lessons Learned: PAB participants (n = 28) felt the training was comprehensive, their feedback was prioritized, and impacted the PAB goal of developing a CER question. Recommendations include giving clinic staff protected time for patient engagement and providing funding.
conclusionsThe developed model led to an increase in participation in CER and effectively trained staff, people with PD and care partners in patient engagement.
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.