ArticleBMC primary care2026
Evaluating the participatory processes within the OECD PaRIS project in Saskatchewan: lessons learned about recruitment and engagement.
Article in BMC primary care, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the participatory recruitment and engagement processes used in the implementation of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys (PaRIS) Project in Saskatchewan, Canada, and to identify lessons to inform future primary care data initiatives.
designParticipatory evaluation using a qualitative, interpretive descriptive approach, guided by a participatory evaluation framework grounded in relational equity.
settingTen purposively selected primary care clinics across Saskatchewan, including academic family medicine units, community health centres, a nurse practitioner–led clinic, and a northern group physician practice, representing urban, rural, remote, and Indigenous-serving areas in the province.
participantsPrimary care practitioners (family physicians and nurse practitioners), clinic administrators and medical office assistants, and people with lived experience who were involved in PaRIS survey implementation and interpretation of clinic-level dashboards.
interventionClinic-level engagement with OECD PaRIS dashboards presenting aggregated patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), supported through relational, trust-based engagement, feedback sessions, and participatory interpretation. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Perceived effectiveness of recruitment and engagement strategies; experiences of dashboard interpretation and use; identified facilitators, challenges, and opportunities for improvement in participatory primary care data initiatives.
resultsEarly, trust-based engagement fostered strong clinic participation, a sense of co-ownership of data, and increased willingness to use findings for reflection and quality improvement. Participants described the dashboards as validating and empowering, particularly when supported by contextualized narratives. Key facilitators included relational transparency, clinic-specific feedback, and iterative feedback loops. Challenges included visual complexity of dashboards, limited access to comparative data due to embargoes, time constraints for team-based reflection, and reduced accessibility for some digitally underserved patient groups. Participants identified opportunities to simplify data visualizations, tailor dissemination formats, and extend engagement timelines, particularly when working with Indigenous communities.
conclusionsRelationship-driven, participatory approaches can meaningfully enhance engagement with PREMs and PROMs in primary care. Embedding relational equity throughout recruitment, data interpretation, and feedback processes supports co-ownership of data and strengthens its relevance for local quality improvement. Our findings offer practical guidance for designing inclusive, culturally responsive primary care data initiatives.
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.