ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2026
Considering Preference-Based Patient Participation-Scientific and Clinical Outcome Measures With the Patient Preferences for Patient Participation Tool.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleIntegrated and person-centred care is defined by several elements, one of them being the terms for patient involvement with respect to their needs and resources. We call this 'patient participation', emphasising the sharing component of mutual information and knowledge exchange and the shared actions of the patient and their healthcare professionals in making plans and decisions, framing goals, and providing for self-care. Comprehensively addressing all aspects, including both patients' preferences for and experiences of participation, deserve support how to investigate and represent preference-based patient participation.
objectiveTo offer theoretical and analytical guidance for the Patient Preferences for Patient Participation tool (the 4Ps), with procedures suitable for research and clinical evaluation.
methodThe paper illustrates the planning and execution of analyses to illuminate preference-based patient participation (or partial such participation, or lack thereof). Also, we discuss why, when, and how to address preferences for patient participation along with preference-based measures. Two sets of reports are presented for research and clinical purposes.
resultsBy means of three cases across different healthcare contexts, we illustrate what these findings represent, and how to differentiate between insufficient, fair, and sufficient terms for preference-based patient participation. Furthermore, the more detailed scale for such patient participation is considered in relation to the outcome measures of interventions in research and clinical improvement.
conclusionThe 4Ps is a means for evaluating preference-based patient participation, though the matching of ordinal measures for preferences and experiences requires a careful and well-informed approach to planning and executing data collection and statistical analyses. As an outcome measure of interventions to facilitate more person-centred healthcare, researchers and clinicians should recognise theoretical and conceptual conditions. This enhances a recognition of patients' voice and choice; patients and staff can agree on how best to make use of resources and needs, improving health and healthcare 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.