ArticleInternational journal of health policy and management2025
Involving Service Users in Care Regulation: A Scoping Review of Empirical Literature.
Article in International journal of health policy and management, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnsuring the quality and safety of service delivery extends beyond the realm of health and care professionals, necessitating collaboration among various stakeholders, including external regulatory organizations. The policy agenda of care regulators increasingly features the topic of service user involvement. Despite the extensive research on participatory healthcare, scholarly attention to service user involvement in regulatory practices has been limited. This scoping review delves into the landscape of service user involvement in the regulation of care services of all types and for all different age groups, examining the characteristics and focus of peer reviewed original research. In particular, it addresses a notable knowledge gap by examining how these studies report on the practical utilization of service user input, as well as the regulator's perspective on service user involvement.
methodsWe conducted a literature search in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, APA PsycInfo, and Scopus from inception to July 14, 2023. Thirteen (n=13) empirical studies were included.
resultsThe underlying motives for service user involvement vary, ranging from legal imperatives and political pressure to enhancing institutional legitimacy and regulatory decision-making. Care regulators employ both reactive and proactive involvement methods. Empirical evidence delineates the challenges and benefits of service user involvement, highlighting concerns about bias, time investments, and the need for a distinct skillset for inspectors. Despite the valuable insights gained, there are instances where service user input is downplayed in practice.
conclusionThe findings underscore the importance of additional research on users' preferences for involvement, optimal communication conditions to honor the collected input, and the challenges inspectors encounter in fostering meaningful involvement with service users. Addressing these challenges is crucial for aligning regulatory efforts with the genuine needs and experiences of services users.
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.