ArticleSociology of health & illness2026
Exploring Vocabularies of Motive to Optimise Patient Engagement for Drug Development.
Article in Sociology of health & illness, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patient engagement in the drug development life cycle is becoming normalised, and the return on investment is being quantified. We sought to understand what motivates biotechnology organisations to undertake patient engagement throughout the drug development life cycle, to enable us to generate theoretically and empirically grounded knowledge to optimise patient engagement. This paper draws upon ethnographic research including 200 hours of informal observation, 50 hours of formal observation, 10 interviews with biotechnology staff and documentary analysis. With patient input throughout this research, we identified a multitude of motives for patient engagement, including regulatory requirements, corporate social responsibility and return on investment. Less evident was the translation of those motives into a framework that could optimise patient engagement over time and at scale. This was due to the dynamic nature of the drug pipeline, the limited critical space in which patient engagement can occur and misconceptions about patient engagement mechanisms, incentives and metrics. Exploring existing vocabularies of motive within an industry-led initiative identified organisational practice in both drug development processes and wider industry practices that have the potential to inhibit meaningful and sustainable engagement, and thus limit translation and optimisation of discovery-to-prescription translation for a wider group of patients.
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.