ArticleHealth science reports2026
Patients' Associations as Co-Creators of Knowledge: Insights From a Community-Based Participatory Research Study (ProSafe Project).
Article in Health science reports, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in research is crucial for producing knowledge that is meaningful to the participating community. Sharing PPIE principles into practical tools and strategies enriches the development of participatory research methodologies. This article describes the co-creation process of Methods: The project is based on an explanatory sequential mixed-method design. A Patient Safety Council (PSC) acted as a co-researcher. The five-level spectrum of public engagement developed by the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) guided the analysis of the decision-making power balance between academics and the PSC at each phase. Emphasis was given to the process of survey co-creation. A SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis was performed to identify strategies and practical recommendations to strengthen engagement. Results: The SWOT analysis results informed the development of OPERA-PACT (Opening a Participatory and Equitable Research Agreement based on Partnership, Awareness, Collaboration, and Trust), a framework co-created with the PSC to formalize shared principles, values, and attitudes that sustain collaborative partnerships. The framework also includes a commitment to continuous monitoring, verification, and feedback to reinforce partnership over time. Conclusions: All instruments, strategies, and methodological insights proposed in the article may serve as practical support tools to strengthen the voice of communities in research and to contribute to the production of valid and translational results. Implementing the OPERA-PACT framework may further help align team members with PPIE principles and lay the foundation for effective and sustainable collaboration.
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.