ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2026
The Ethical Foundations of Accompanying Patients: The Need for Institutionalization.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The partnership approach is part of a broader shift in healthcare that seeks to empower patients in their own care. Accompanying patients (APs) extend the concept of peer support. They are experienced patients who engage directly and individually with new patients, enhancing the partnership model. However, the ethical foundations of this role and the ethical tensions arising from its integration are underexplored. To identify the key skills and values required by APs and the ethical tensions they experience, we conducted a qualitative study based on in-depth interviews with nineteen APs between January and May 2021 in Québec, Canada. Interviews explored motivations, skills, values, and experiences in healthcare institutions. Thematic analysis was complemented by Tannahill's public health ethics framework to interpret the ethical tensions identified. The core values identified for this role were empathy, respect, and altruism. All participants agreed that experiential knowledge was paramount. APs identified independence from healthcare institutions as the key to connecting and developing a trusting relationship with patients. However, they also expressed a need to be part of the healthcare system to ensure the sustainability of their role. Our results show an ethical tension between the philosophical core of APs and their needs to pursue their functions. We conclude that independence and authenticity as an AP is not necessarily incompatible with institutionalization, professionalization, and remuneration. These can be achieved if AP programmes are aligned with the philosophy of patient partnership, structured with flexible criteria, and remain self-regulated.
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.