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
. 2022 Apr;37(Suppl 1):6-13.
doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-07104-w. Epub 2022 Mar 29.

Understanding the Influence and Impact of Stakeholder Engagement in Patient-centered Outcomes Research: a Qualitative Study

Maureen Maurer  1 , Rikki Mangrum  2 , Tandrea Hilliard-Boone  3 , Andrew Amolegbe  4 , Kristin L Carman  5 , Laura Forsythe  5 , Rachel Mosbacher  5 , Julie Kennedy Lesch  5 , Krista Woodward  5
Affiliations

Understanding the Influence and Impact of Stakeholder Engagement in Patient-centered Outcomes Research: a Qualitative Study

Maureen Maurer et al. J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Engaging patients and other stakeholders as partners in research offers promise in improving the relevance and usefulness of research findings.

Objective: To explore the influence and impact of patient and other stakeholder engagement on the planning and conduct of comparative effectiveness research studies.

Design: Qualitative study with virtual, hour-long semi-structured interviews.

Participants: Fifty-eight researchers and fifty-one partners from a diverse purposeful sample of fifty-eight studies funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI).

Approach: Content and thematic analysis of interview data.

Key results: Described as an integral, long-term part of the research process, engagement influenced all aspects of the design and execution of studies. Partner influence was also dynamic and iterative, taking different forms over the course of the study. Across studies, we identified 387 discrete examples of influence and classified each as one of five types of influence, derived inductively from the interview data: co-producing, redirecting, refining, confirming, and limited. Most projects exhibited multiple types of influence, with 50 researchers and 41 partners reporting two or more types of influence within a project. Of the 387 examples of stakeholder influence, 306 had at least one reported impact on the study. Such impacts included changes to reflect the needs and preferences of patients or clinicians, as well as impacts on study feasibility, study quality, engagement scope or quality, and study relevance. Both researchers and partners identified multiple types of impact within projects, with 42 researchers and 38 partners reporting two or more types within a project. Because of these observable impacts, researchers and partners described engagement as worthwhile.

Conclusions: Findings provide insights for funders and institutions supporting engagement, measurement efforts, and clinical researchers aiming to conduct engaged research and observe similar influences and impacts in their own studies.

Keywords: comparative effectiveness research; patient and public involvement; patient and stakeholder engagement; patient-centered outcomes research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

References

    1. Esmail L, Moore E, Rein A. Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: Moving from theory to practice. J Comp Effect Res. 2015;4(2):133–145. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.79. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Domecq JP, Prutsky G, Elraiyah T, et al. Patient engagement in research: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014;14:89. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-89. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, et al. Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect. 2015;18(5):1151–1166. doi: 10.1111/hex.12090. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Forsythe L, Heckert A, Margolis MK, Schrandt S, Frank L. Methods and impact of engagement in research, from theory to practice and back again: early findings from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(1):17–31. doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1581-x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C, et al. Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review. Health Expect. 2014;17(5):637–650. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources