ArticleOTJR : occupation, participation and health2026
Engagement to Identify Health Priorities of People With Intellectual and/or Developmental Disability.
Article in OTJR : occupation, participation and health, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People with lived experiences are often excluded from development of solutions and decision-making related to health research and policy. To describe and demonstrate how high-quality engagement supports partner and project outcomes. The ultimate project outcome was to identify health priorities desired by people with intellectual and/or developmental disability (IDD) and the people who support achieving those priorities, including caregivers, clinicians, and payers/regulators. This capacity-building project implemented and evaluated methods of engagement of IDD self-advocates, caregivers/partners, clinicians, payers/regulators, and researchers. Our reliance on a variety of engagement approaches, but particularly graphic illustration and other visual engagement, yielded productive conversations to advance areas of priority. Partners felt satisfied with engagement and continued to participate at multiple points throughout the 2-year project. We identified nine illustrated priority health outcomes useful for research, practice, and policy change. Our engagement and priority-setting approach resulted in findings that partners found compelling personally and professionally.
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.