ArticleBMC health services research2026
Research engagement of rare disease patient advocacy groups in Poland: between participation and constrained co-production.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRare diseases (RDs) present complex challenges, including diagnostic uncertainty, limited treatment options, and fragmented research and care systems. These constraints contribute to inequities in access to care, information, and research participation among patients and caregivers across social and institutional contexts. In this setting, rare disease patient advocacy groups (RDPAGs) have emerged as key actors, not only providing support to patients and caregivers but also increasingly engaging in research. However, empirical evidence regarding their research engagement and organisational capacities remains limited, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe. This study examines the engagement of RDPAGs in research and intersectoral collaboration in Poland.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted between January and April 2026 among representatives of 64 Polish RDPAGs using a structured, web-based questionnaire. The questionnaire covered organisational characteristics, research engagement, collaboration, and perceived barriers. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics.
resultsMost RDPAGs reported at least occasional engagement in research, although involvement was heterogeneous and often limited in scope. RDPAGs were primarily active in non-clinical research domains, including social research, patient registries, and dissemination of research findings. Participation in clinical and translational research was less frequent and largely supportive, particularly in recruitment and patient support. A majority of RDPAGs did not initiate research activities, and only a small proportion reported high levels of engagement. Key barriers included a lack of funding, limited human resources, and restricted influence on research processes. Despite these constraints, collaboration with physicians was common, although often informal. The findings indicate that RDPAGs function as intermediary actors and knowledge brokers, partially compensating for structural gaps in healthcare and research systems by facilitating access to information, support, and research participation for patients and caregivers. The findings further suggest a model of constrained co-production, in which RDPAGs participate in research but remain insufficiently integrated into research decision-making and knowledge production.
conclusionsRDPAGs play an important but structurally constrained role in research and knowledge co-production. Strengthening their contribution requires formalised collaboration frameworks, improved access to resources, capacity-building initiatives, and earlier and more meaningful involvement across the research cycle. Enhancing their role may contribute to more inclusive and effective research systems in the rare disease field. 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.