ArticleBMJ open2021
Patient and public involvement in numerical aspects of trials: a mixed methods theory-informed survey of trialists' current practices, barriers and facilitators.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Exploring Patient and Caregiver Perceptions of the Facilitators and Barriers to Patient Engagement in Research: Participatory Qualitative Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Establishing patient partners' roles on research teams: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- "The power imbalance was blown out the window": developing and implementing creative workshops to enhance communication of statistics in patient and public involvement in clinical trials.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Starting a conversation about estimands with public partners involved in clinical trials: a co-developed tool.Trials · 2023Article
- Involving patients and the public In sTatistIcal Analysis pLans (INITIAL): A delphi survey.PloS one · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to find out if trialists involve patients and the public in numerical aspects of trials, how and what are the barriers and facilitators to doing it.
designWe developed a survey based on the Theoretical Domains Framework. We used a mixed methods approach to analyse the data and to identify important domains.
settingOnline survey targeting UK-based trial units.
participantsStakeholders working in UK-based clinical trials, 18 years old or over, understand English and agree to take part in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Trialists' behaviour of involving patients and the public in numerical aspects of trials and its determinants.
resultsWe included 187 respondents. Majority were female (70%), trial managers (67%) and involved public and patient partners in numerical aspects of trials (60%). We found lack of knowledge, trialists' perception of public and patient partners' skills, capabilities and motivations, scarce resources, lack of reinforcement, and lack of guidance were barriers to involving public and patient partners in numerical aspects of trials. Positive beliefs about consequences were an incentive to doing it.
conclusionsMore training, guidance and funding can help trialists involve patient and public partners in numerical aspects, although they were uncertain about public and patient partners' motivation to be involved. Future research should focus on identifying public and patient partners' motivations and develop strategies to improve the communication of numerical aspects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.