ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022
Patient and researcher experiences of patient engagement in primary care health care research: A participatory qualitative study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experiences of general practice teams and their patients with clinical research-a mixed-methods process evaluation of the Bavarian Research Practice Network (BayFoNet).BMC primary care · 2025Trial
- Compensating patient partners on health research teams: a qualitative descriptive study of barriers, facilitators, and implications for equity, diversity, and inclusion in Canadian patient-oriented research.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Patients as Co-Researchers in Oncology: A Qualitative Exploration of Participatory Governance.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Using Partner-Driven Maximum Variance Sampling to Form a Lived Experience Panel: Step-by-Step Tutorial.Journal of participatory medicine · 2026Article
- Empowering patients in family medicine research: a case-study of patient partner involvement in educational and knowledge translation activities.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Consumer Engagement in Chronic Conditions Research: An Integrated Framework Informed by Recognition Theory.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Operationalizing Trauma-Informed Principles to Build Safe, Inclusive, and Equitable Patient Partnerships in Pediatric Pain Research.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- What actually happens in partnered health research? A concordance analysis of agreement on partnership practices in funded Canadian projects between academic and knowledge user investigators.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Exploring Patient and Caregiver Perceptions of the Facilitators and Barriers to Patient Engagement in Research: Participatory Qualitative Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- Public Involvement in Complex Theorising: A Co-Produced Logic Model of the Role of Context in Shaping Child Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- A Training Program to Support Patient Engagement in Primary Health Care Research: Co-Design, Implementation, and Evaluation Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2025Article
- The Importance of Lived Experience: A Scoping Review on the Value of Patient and Public Involvement in Health Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- American Medical Extended Reality Association Expert Consensus: Best Practices for Patient and Public Involvement in Medical Extended Reality Research.Journal of medical extended reality · 2025Article
- Community case study of patient and clinician early engagement in research on multiple chronic conditions using an implementation guide.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Citizen science for research in public health: perspective.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Researcher and partner perspectives on the relationship between engagement in research and three uses of patient-centered comparative clinical effectiveness research study findings.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Bridging the divide: supporting and mentoring trainees to conceptualize, plan, and integrate engagement of people with lived experience in health research.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Article
- [Research partners in health services research: need, acceptance and feasibility of preparatory trainings].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024Article
- Fostering collective leadership to improve integrated primary care: lessons learned from the PriCARE program.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies have highlighted common challenges and barriers to patient engagement in research, but most were based on patient partners' or academic researchers' experiences. A better understanding of how both groups differentially experience their partnership could help identify strategies to improve collaboration in patient engagement research.
aimThis study aimed to describe and compare patient partners' and academic researchers' experiences in patient engagement research.
methodsBased on a participatory approach, a descriptive qualitative study was conducted with patient partners and academic researchers who are involved in the PriCARE research programme in primary health care to examine their experience of patient engagement. Individual semi-structured interviews with patient partners (n = 7) and academic researchers (n = 15) were conducted. Academic researchers' interview verbatims, deidentified patient partners' summaries of their interviews and summaries of meetings with patient partners were analysed using inductive thematic analysis in collaboration with patient partners.
resultsPatient partners and academic researchers' experiences with patient engagement are captured within four themes: (1) evolving relationships; (2) creating an environment that fosters patient engagement; (3) striking a balance; and (4) impact and value of patient engagement. Evolving relationships refers to how partnerships grew and improved over time with an acceptance of tensions and willingness to move beyond them, two-way communication and leadership of key team members. Creating an environment that fosters patient engagement requires appropriate structural support, such as clear descriptions of patient partner roles; adequate training for all team members; institutional guidance on patient engagement; regular and appropriate translation services; and financial assistance. For patient partners and academic researchers, striking a balance referred to the challenge of reconciling patient partners' interests and established research practices. Finally, both groups recognized the value and positive impact of patient engagement in the programme in terms of improving the relevance of research and the applicability of results. While patient partners and academic researchers identified similar challenges and strategies, their experiences of patient engagement differed according to their own backgrounds, motives and expectations.
conclusionBoth patient partners and academic researchers highlighted the importance of finding a balance between providing structure or guidelines for patient engagement, while allowing for flexibility along the way. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient partners from the PriCARE research programme were involved in the following aspects of the current study: (1) development of the research objectives; (2) planning of the research design; (3) development and validation of data collection tools (i.e., interview guides); (4) production of data (i.e., acted as interviewees); (5) validation of data analysis tools (code book); (6) analysis of qualitative data; and (7) drafting of the manuscript and contributing to other knowledge translation activities, such as conference presentations and the creation of a short animated video.
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.