ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026
Developing best practices for engaging and involving palliative care patients in research in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 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
Abstract
backgroundPatient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) are pivotal to maximising the impact of research on clinical care. Despite growing recognition of its importance, there remains limited evidence on best practices for implementing meaningful and contextually appropriate PPIE particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.
aimThis study aimed to explore patients and caregivers perspectives on meaningful engagement and involvement in palliative care research in Africa and identify contextually appropriate recommendations for establishing, supporting and sustaining PPIE structures and networks.
methodsThis multi-national, qualitative cross-sectional study was conducted across four sub-Saharan African countries. We conducted qualitative studies across four African countries. In Ghana, Malawi, and Zimbabwe, in-depth interviews were conducted with older adults receiving primary or palliative care for chronic conditions. In Uganda, two focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with adult cancer patients. Topic guides explored: (1) the perceived added value of PPIE in research; (2) how patients and caregivers wished to engage in research; (3) potential roles within the research process; (4) preferred structures for PPIE activities; (5) capacity-building and training needs; and (6) support and resources required for effective participation. All interviews and FGDs were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using framework analysis.
resultsA total of 94 participants were recruited, comprising 57 patients and 37 caregivers (no caregivers were recruited in Uganda). Participants viewed PPIE as a platform for patient empowerment and meaningful engagement in research. Key areas in which participants wished to be involved included identifying research priorities, participating in ethical review processes, supporting patient identification and recruitment, contributing to data collection, engaging in research dissemination, and prioritising recommendations for patient care and health policy. Preferred PPIE formats included workshops and panel discussions, with quarterly meetings suggested. Training needs focused on capacity building, empowerment for PPIE roles, and preparing materials for dissemination.
conclusionThis study provides evidence-based recommendations for developing and sustaining meaningful PPIE in palliative care research in sub-Saharan Africa. Our findings contribute to the formalisation of PPIE in African palliative care research. Further work is needed to implement, refine and evaluate these approaches across different settings. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.