Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Apr;18(2):153-65.
doi: 10.1111/hex.12038. Epub 2012 Dec 18.

What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review

Affiliations

What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review

Annalijn Conklin et al. Health Expect. 2015 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Public involvement in health-care policy has been advocated as a means to enhance health system responsiveness, yet evidence for its impact has been difficult to ascertain.

Objectives: To review the peer-reviewed empirical evidence on outcomes of public involvement in health-care policy.

Methods: We systematically searched PsychINFO and PubMed from November 2000 to April 2010 for empirical studies that reported on original research only; studies in languages other than English, German or French were excluded. Data were extracted using a standardized evidence table with a priori determined headings.

Main results: Nineteen studies were identified as eligible for inclusion in our review. We found that sound empirical evidence of the outcomes of public involvement activities in health care remains underdeveloped. The concept and the indicators used to examine and determine outcomes remain poorly specified and inconsistent, as does the reporting of the evidence. There was some evidence for the developmental role of public involvement, such as enhancing awareness, understanding and competencies among lay participants. Evidence for instrumental benefits of public involvement initiatives was less well documented.

Conclusions: Despite the growing body of work on public involvement in health-care policy, evidence of its impact remains scarce; thus, firm conclusions about involvement activities that are appropriate and effective for policy development are difficult to draw. However, focus on outcomes risks missing the normative argument that involving the public in the health-care policy process may be seen to be of intrinsic value.

Keywords: decision making; health policy; impact; outcomes; priority-setting; public involvement; review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of literature search and selection of papers. *Exclusion criteria: service development (micro‐level); participatory action research; planning health research priorities; public health programme design/planning; treatment decision making; clinical decision; shared decision making; care/discharge planning; therapeutic and service delivery decisions; preferences for/views on participation; guidance/framework/concept; dissertations; book/chapters; grey literature; editorials/opinion papers.

References

    1. Wait S, Nolte E. Public involvement policies in health: exploring their conceptual basis. Health Economics, Policy and Law, 2006; 1: 149–162. - PubMed
    1. Tritter J. Revolution or evolution: the challenges of conceptualizing patient and public involvement in a consumerist world. Health Expectations, 2009; 12: 275–287. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Conklin A, Morris Z, Nolte E. Involving the public in healthcare policy: an update of the research evidence and proposed evaluation framework. Cambridge: RAND Europe, 2010.
    1. Florin D, Dixon J. Public involvement in health care. British Medical Journal, 2004; 328: 159–161. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Coulter A. The autonomous patient: ending paternalism in medical care. London: The Nuffield Trust, 2002.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources