Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41897000›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026

Making space to listen: engaging people with a chronic condition and various health literacy levels as citizen researchers.

N de Graef, D F L Hertroijs, J M Cramm, D Ruwaard, A M J Elissen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

N de GraefDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. nienke.degraef@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
D F L HertroijsDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
J M CrammTilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
D RuwaardDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
A M J ElissenDepartment of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite growing calls for patient and public involvement (PPI) to improve research relevance and inclusivity, it is still too often implemented in a tokenistic way. Health inequalities persist, and vulnerable populations, such as people with chronic conditions and/or limited health literacy (LHL), remain underrepresented as active participants in research. Factors contributing to this underrepresentation include complex research language, unfamiliar settings, and social stigma. To bridge the gap, this study aims to offer practical lessons that provide researchers and policymakers with concrete strategies for creating inclusive and effective research collaboration processes.

methodsA participatory action research approach was used, guided by the first three stages of the Participatory Research to Action (PR2A) framework: readiness, discover, and define. Data were collected across five group sessions with ten individuals with type 2 diabetes and various health literacy levels. The analysis focused on process-related data to explore recruitment, facilitation strategies, and participatory experiences.

resultsEffective recruitment relied on a multifaceted community outreach approach, combining online and offline channels, which improved group diversity. Clarifying expectations at the outset and balancing structure and flexibility supported meaningful contributions, and allowed sessions to be adapted to individual needs. This approach fostered factors central to motivation and group cohesion, including a collective purpose and mutual respect, while recognising the varied experiences of managing diabetes. Equitable engagement between citizen researchers and PPI facilitators was essential to valuing diverse perspectives and maintaining shared responsibility. Creative co-creation strategies, including sketching and small-group exercises, proved more effective in promoting accessible, inclusive engagement than text-based or plenary-only methods.

conclusionsThe study demonstrates that recruiting and engaging citizens with type 2 diabetes and various health literacy levels as citizen researchers is feasible when conditions such as equitable partnership and engagement, clear expectations, and flexible structures are met. Creative co-creation strategies further support accessible and meaningful participation. These insights provide practical guidance for researchers seeking to implement inclusive PPI, contribute to reducing health inequalities, and inform the next stages of the PR2A framework for advancing participatory health research.

Identifiers

PMID41897000
PMCPMC13097917

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.