ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026
Partnership by design: co-designing an institutional framework for engagement at a leading Canadian pediatric hospital.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare institutions are increasingly recognizing the importance of implementing integrated processes for carrying out patient engagement in health systems improvement and research, however, concrete tools and guidance for doing so are needed. While frameworks for engagement exist, most are not specific to pediatric organizational settings where children, youth, families, and community members are engaged across the continuum of clinical care, research, and education. To address this gap, an organization-wide framework for engagement that would have relevance to clinical care, research, and education was co-designed with patient and family advisors and staff at a large pediatric hospital.
objectivesThis commentary aims to (i) describe the process of co-designing an organization-wide engagement framework; (ii) share lessons learned about the co-design process; and (iii) document the experience of the co-design process from the perspectives of family advisors and staff. MAIN BODY: The framework development process consisted of several steps over the course of a year, including: (i) interviews and focus groups to identify advisor and staff priority areas, (ii) an environmental scan, (iii) a co-design process, (iv) patient consultation, and (v) a framework validation survey. This process revealed important learnings, including the importance of flexible approaches for collaboration, rapport-building, transparency about how advisor and staff input was being used, and highlighting the practical relevance of the framework and its implementation.
conclusionDeveloping an organization-wide framework for engagement uncovered key challenges and insights related to co-design, resulting in a ready-to-implement framework. Evaluations indicated the co-design experience was positive and impactful for members. The methods employed in this initiative can be applied to various healthcare settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The framework development process involved collaboration with patient and family advisors to bring their crucial insights to its content and design. This article was co-authored with family advisors.
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.