Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42740884›Full record

ArticleClinical and public health guidelines2024

Consumer engagement in living evidence "a beautiful opportunity": International qualitative study with patients and methodologists.

Anneliese Synnot, Laura Weeks, Sophie J Hill, Lyubov Lytvyn, Tamara Radar, Rebecca Randall, Richard Morley, Allison Jaure, Julian H Elliott, Tari Turner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and public health guidelines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

10 authors.

Anneliese SynnotAustralian Living Evidence Collaboration, Cochrane Australia, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4008-4208
Laura WeeksCanadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Sophie J HillCentre for Health Communication and Participation, School of Psychology and Public Health La Trobe University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Lyubov LytvynMcMaster University Hamilton Ontario Canada.
Tamara RadarCanadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health Ottawa Ontario Canada.
Rebecca RandallHealth Consumer Representative Canberra Australian Capital Territory Australia.
Richard MorleyCochrane London UK.
Allison JaureSydney School of Public Health The University of Sydney Sydney New South Wales Australia.
Julian H ElliottAustralian Living Evidence Collaboration, Cochrane Australia, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Tari TurnerAustralian Living Evidence Collaboration, Cochrane Australia, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine Monash University Melbourne Victoria Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to explore the opportunities, challenges and practical strategies for consumer engagement (i.e., patient and public involvement) in living evidence (systematic reviews, guidelines and health technology assessments that are continually updated with the latest evidence). Study Design and Setting: In this international qualitative study, methodologists (producers of systematic reviewers, guidelines and health technology assessments) with an interest in living evidence, and consumers (patients, informal carers, the public and their representatives) with experience contributing to evidence synthesis production participated in either a face-to-face workshop, online focus group or semistructured interview. We analysed data using descriptive synthesis. Results: Forty-one methodologists and seven consumers from nine countries participated. A minority of participants in both groups had direct experience with living evidence synthesis. We identified seven themes: harnessing consumer enthusiasm in recruitment; 'better' consumer engagement based on deeper relationships; improved and ongoing orientation, support and remuneration; maintaining an ongoing commitment; potentially different guideline development stages and tasks; larger groups of consumers and multiple roles; and ongoing incorporation of consumer insights. Conclusion: Methodologists and consumers believe living evidence approaches present an imperative and an opportunity to explore new models of consumer engagement, bringing together larger and more diverse communities of consumers in true partnerships with methodologists. Consumer engagement strategies for living evidence allow ongoing improvement to engagement methods and ongoing incorporation of consumer experiences, preferences and values as they develop and change over time.

Indexed as

consumer engagementliving evidenceliving guidelinesliving health technology assessmentliving systematic reviewpatient and public involvement

Identifiers

PMID42740884
PMCPMC13563385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.