ArticleJournal of patient experience2026
Evaluation of the Diabetes Action Canada (DAC) Research-To-Action Fellowship Program for Patient Partners: A Multi-Method Case Study.
Article in Journal of patient experience, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of our study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and early impacts of the inaugural Research-to-Action Fellowship Program (FP) on patient partnership and knowledge mobilization (KM) practice within a diabetes research network. The FP is a patient-partner-centric initiative co-designed by patient partners, FP interest holders and implementers to build capacity in KM. Fellows receive mentorship, training, and financial support to co-design and disseminate KM products with community-based partner organizations. A formative, multi-method case study using surveys, focus groups, and interviews was conducted with patient-partner fellows, partner-organization representatives, and program implementers. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively; qualitative data were examined using directed content analysis. Fifteen of 16 invited participants contributed data. Fellows reported perceived gains in KM-related knowledge, clarity of roles, support, collaboration, and community engagement. Qualitative themes highlighted the value of paid, leadership-based roles for patient partners, dyad structures, strong relational infrastructure, and iterative adaptation. Overall, our study showed that a patient-partner-led KM fellowship was perceived as feasible and acceptable, and as a means of building capacity for more meaningful patient partnership.
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.