The impact of patient and public involvement in health research versus healthcare: A scoping review of reviews

Modigh, Anton; Sampaio, Filipa; Moberg, Linda; Fredriksson, Mio

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2021.07.008

Cited by 48 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, patients and the public are seen as equal partners in research and healthcare (24;29). Their lived experiences contribute additional expertise and give valuable, novel insights that can significantly enhance the relevance and impact of research outputs as well as improve patient-centeredness of services (30). Similarly, some guideline development and HTA organizations, such as NICE, recruit and involve patients and people using health and care services into their guideline development committees as equal members with voting rights in the decision-making process (17).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Values, principles, strategies, and frameworks underlying patient and public involvement in health technology assessment and guideline development: a scoping review

Pinho-Gomes

Stone

Shaw

et al. 2022

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of patient and public involvement (PPI) is recognized by agencies involved in health technology assessment (HTA) and guideline development. However, a comprehensive overview of the underlying PPI principles, values, strategies, and frameworks is lacking. This scoping review aimed to summarize the available evidence on principles, values, frameworks, and strategies underpinning PPI carried out by agencies involved in HTA and guideline development. A total of twelve records were included, of which four referred to guidelines and eight to HTA. Overall, this review demonstrated a lack of consistency in the definition and application of the concepts of values and principles to PPI in the context of guideline development and HTA. There was significant overlap between values and principles, with some broad themes emerging, such as representation, transparency, relevance, equity, fairness, and reconciling different types of knowledge. Frameworks were typically based on the stages of guideline development or HTA, despite heterogeneity in how stages were labeled and described. Strategies were also mapped to the stages of guideline development and HTA and varied substantially depending on the context and setting. Both strategies and frameworks demonstrated patients and the public can be involved, albeit to a variable extent, throughout the stages of guideline development and HTA. However, frameworks often failed to explicitly link the values and principles with the HTA and guideline development stages through actionable PPI strategies. Further research is warranted to better understand the values, principles, and frameworks underpinning PPI in guideline development and HTA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Values, principles, strategies, and frameworks underlying patient and public involvement in health technology assessment and guideline development: a scoping review

Pinho-Gomes

Stone

Shaw

et al. 2022

Int J Technol Assess Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To ensure we capture most relevant literature, we have developed a search strategy with a medical librarian experienced in literature reviews in the health sciences. Additionally, due to intensive NIHR efforts to set standards for patient and public involvement (i.e., citizen engagement) [ 26 ], much of the literature on citizen engagement in health research originates from the UK [ 25 , 27 – 29 ]. Consequently, our scoping review will likely include more UK-based citizen engagement literature than any other country.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating and evaluating citizen engagement in health research: a scoping review protocol

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Citizen engagement in research is an emerging practice that involves members of the general public in research processes such as priority setting, planning, decision-making, research conduct, implementation, evaluation, and dissemination. Engaging citizens in research, particularly health research, increases the relevance of study findings, minimizes waste by facilitating stewardship over resources, and builds public trust in the research. While several existing frameworks guide the application of citizen engagement principles to health research, it is unclear how citizen engagement can be utilized to maximize benefits and minimize risks and challenges in health research. To address the gaps in knowledge around citizen engagement in health research, we propose a scoping review to synthesize the state of knowledge on methods to incorporate and evaluate citizen engagement in research. A protocol is presented in this manuscript. Methods The methodology for our scoping review is guided by Arksey and O’ Malley’s framework for scoping reviews, and additional recommendations by Levac and colleagues. We will include peer-reviewed and gray literature that report on citizen engagement in health research (including biomedical, clinical, health systems and services, and social, cultural, environmental and population health) and report method(s) to conduct, measure, or evaluate citizen engagement. We will systematically search electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, JSTOR, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Science Direct) from inception onwards and search relevant organizations’ websites for additional studies, frameworks, and reports on citizen engagement. Title and abstract and full-text citations will be screened independently and in duplicate. Data will be extracted independently and in duplicate, including document characteristics, citizen engagement definitions and goals, and outcomes of citizen engagement (e.g., barriers, facilitators). Discussion This review will synthesize the definitions, goals, methods, outcomes, and significance of citizen engagement in health research, as well as any potential barriers, facilitators, and challenges outlined in existing literature. The findings will provide an evidence-based foundation for developing new or improved guidance for citizen engagement in health research. Overall, we anticipate that our scoping review will be a preliminary step to meaningful engagement of citizens in research and strengthen the relationship between the scientific community and the public through transparency and collaboration. Systematic review registration Open Science Framework https://osf.io/hzcbr.

show abstract

“…A year later, a study of the model showed that cardiovascular care was effective at the PHC and clinical levels. The study showed no difference, i.e., the mortality of patients treated by multidisciplinary teams of PHC, and patients observed in the clinic was not different [ 23 ]. The difference between a general practitioner and a district physician is the greater range of responsibilities and the greater breadth of the medical profile, allowing a timely response to any concern of the patient and collecting more information on his condition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of primary health care indicators security standing in Belgium and Norway: Lessons from readiness to COVID-19

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research aims to suggest the most enabling indicator of COVID-19 resistance in Belgium and Norway by studying the dynamics of staff and bed security indicators of the primary health care sector. The research methodology comprises Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) statistical analysis of staff and bed security indicators. The reason for choosing Belgium and Norway for comparative analysis regarding the readiness to face the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of staff and bed security is because Belgium is leading by the highest level and Norway is leading by the lowest level of morbidity and mortality per 1 million population. The study revealed that the greatest enabler of the primary health care system efficiency in terms of resistance to COVID-19 is primary health care staff security. The analysis clearly shows that the number of beds is not paramount for the effectiveness of the healthcare system and primary health care. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the deficiencies and weaknesses of primary health care systems of all countries of the world. The research results suggest that Belgium and other countries focus on the education of nurses and therapists. The significance of the research results is that they prove that the main factor of the effectiveness of the primary health care system is its human resources. This information is useful for improving health systems in many countries around the world.

show abstract

The impact of patient and public involvement in health research versus healthcare: A scoping review of reviews

Cited by 48 publications

References 72 publications

Values, principles, strategies, and frameworks underlying patient and public involvement in health technology assessment and guideline development: a scoping review

Values, principles, strategies, and frameworks underlying patient and public involvement in health technology assessment and guideline development: a scoping review

Incorporating and evaluating citizen engagement in health research: a scoping review protocol

Comparative analysis of primary health care indicators security standing in Belgium and Norway: Lessons from readiness to COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About