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
Review
. 2021 Aug;24(4):1056-1071.
doi: 10.1111/hex.13279. Epub 2021 May 28.

Patient partners' perspectives of meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews: A patient-oriented rapid review

Catherine Boden  1 , Anne Marie Edmonds  2 , Tom Porter  2 , Brenna Bath  3 , Kate Dunn  4 , Angie Gerrard  1 , Donna Goodridge  5 , Christine Stobart  4
Affiliations
Review

Patient partners' perspectives of meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews: A patient-oriented rapid review

Catherine Boden et al. Health Expect. 2021 Aug.

Abstract

Background: A growing literature describes promising practices for patient-oriented research (POR) generally; however, those for systematic reviews are largely derived through the lens of a researcher. This rapid review sought to understand meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews from the patient partner (PP) perspective.

Design: The review team comprised PPs, librarians, SCPOR staff and academic faculty. We searched OVID MEDLINE and EMBASE, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, and core POR websites. Documents describing PP reflections on their involvement in synthesis reviews were included. Screening and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Thematic analysis was employed to identify themes in the data regarding PP perceptions of engagement in synthesis reviews.

Results: The literature search yielded 1386 citations. Eight journal articles and one blog post were included. Seven studies focused on conducting systematic reviews on a particular health or patient-related topic to which PP involvement was an important part and two studies focused specifically on the experience of including PP in synthesis reviews. PPs engaged in the review process through a variety of mechanisms, levels and stages of the review process. Three major themes emerged from the data: (1) foster partnerships through team development, (2) provide opportunities for outcomes valued by PP and (3) strengthen the research endeavour.

Conclusion: Fostering partnerships through team development is foundational for meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews. It requires sensitively balancing of various needs (eg overburdening with contributions). Meaningful involvement in reviews has both personal and research benefits.

Patient involvement: Patient partners were equal collaborators in all aspects of the review.

Keywords: consumer participation; knowledge synthesis; knowledge translation; patient and public involvement; patient engagement; patient-oriented research; systematic reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
PRISMA flow diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Canadian Institute of Health Research . Canada’s Strategy for Patient‐Oriented Research: Improving Health Outcomes through Evidence‐Informed Care; 2011:40. https://cihr‐irsc.gc.ca/e/documents/P‐O_Research_Strategy‐eng.pdf
    1. Aubin D, Hebert M, Eurich D. The importance of measuring the impact of patient‐oriented research. Can Med Assoc J. 2019;191(31):E860‐E864. 10.1503/cmaj.190237 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Canadian Institute of Health Research . CIHR Jargon Buster. Published January 14, 2015. Accessed September 1, 2020. https://cihr‐irsc.gc.ca/e/48952.html
    1. de Wit M, Abma T, Loon MK, Collins S, Kirwan J. Involving patient research partners has a significant impact on outcomes research: a responsive evaluation of the international OMERACT conferences. BMJ Open. 2013;3(5):e002241. 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002241 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abma TA. Patients as partners in a health research agenda setting: the feasibility of a participatory methodology. Eval Health Prof. 2006;29(4):424‐439. 10.1177/0163278706293406 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types