Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42066297›Full record

ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2026

Advancing the Science of Patient Input in Drug Research and Development.

Marilyn A Metcalf, Henrietta Awo Osei-Anto, Thomas J Sharpe, Luther T Clark, Carolyn K Shore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marilyn A MetcalfGSK, Durham, NC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5328-1489
Henrietta Awo Osei-AntoTiwaa Health Consultancy, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3200-221X
Thomas J SharpeSharpe Patient Insights, Fort Lauderdale, FL, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1637-594X
Luther T ClarkMerck, New Jersey, NJ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8247-8272
Carolyn K ShoreNational Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5988-5128

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration of patient input into drug research & development (R&D) enables the production of medicines that better meet the needs of patients. While momentum for advancing the science of patient input has continued to grow, there remain a host of barriers to full implementation and integration of systematic approaches for collecting and using robust and meaningful patient input data to inform decision-making. To help address these barriers, the Advancing the Science of Patient Input Action Collaborative (the collaborative), an activity associated with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (National Academies) Forum on Drug Discovery, Development, and Translation, organized a multi-stakeholder endeavor to identify and address key barriers to implementation through a series of information-gathering efforts. The collaborative engaged a wide range of perspectives to seek out practical paths forward to better align drug discovery, development, and regulation with patient priorities for disease management and treatment. Collaborative participants focused on three overarching research priorities which, if effectively addressed, would help advance the science of patient input: 1) understanding the patient experience over the course of a given disease or medical condition, 2) capturing the patient perspectives and priorities on benefit-risk, and 3) incorporating patient input into clinical trial design and continuous improvement. Addressing these research priorities would help decision makers shift away from using patient input in particular cases or for one-off applications and towards the integration of patient input as part of everyday medical research and practice. Building upon existing guidances and strategies, and sharing lessons learned from use cases, a comprehensive patient input framework would serve as a critical step towards reimagining and enriching the science of patient input throughout the drug R&D process, enabling a future in which medicines more fully meet the needs of patients.

Indexed as

clinical researchclinical trialsdrug research and developmentpatient-centeredpatient input

Identifiers

PMID42066297
PMCPMC13179488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.