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
. 2023 Feb 26;30(3):2770-2780.
doi: 10.3390/curroncol30030210.

Patient Engagement in Health Research: Perspectives from Patient Participants

Julie Easley  1 , Richard Wassersug  2 , Sharon Matthias  3 , Margaret Tompson  4 , Nancy D Schneider  5 , Mary Ann O'Brien  6 , Bonnie Vick  7 , Margaret Fitch  8
Affiliations

Patient Engagement in Health Research: Perspectives from Patient Participants

Julie Easley et al. Curr Oncol. .

Abstract

Background and purpose: Over the past decade, patient engagement (PE) has emerged as an important way to help improve the relevance, quality, and impact of health research. However, there is limited consensus on how best to meaningfully engage patients in the research process. The goal of this article is to share our experiences and insights as members of a Patient Advisory Committee (PAC) on a large, multidisciplinary cancer research study that has spanned six years. We hope by sharing our reflections of the PAC experiences, we can highlight successes, challenges, and lessons learned to help guide PE in future health research. To the best of our knowledge, few publications describing PE experiences in health research teams have been written by patients, survivors, or family caregivers themselves.

Methods: A qualitative approach was used to gather reflections from members of the Patient Advisory Committee regarding their experiences in participating in a research study over six years. Each member completed an online survey and engaged in a group discussion based on the emergent themes from the survey responses.

Results: Our reflections about experiences as a PAC on a large, pan-Canadian research study include three overarching topics (1) what worked well; (2) areas for improvement; and (3) reflections on our overall contribution and impact. Overall, we found the experience positive and experienced personal satisfaction but there were areas where future improvements could be made. These areas include earlier engagement and training in the research process, more frequent communication between the patient committee and the research team, and on-going monitoring regarding the nature of the patient engagement.

Conclusions: Engaging individuals who have experienced the types of events which are the focus of a research study can contribute to the overall relevance of the project. However, intentional efforts are necessary to ensure satisfactory involvement.

Keywords: community-based participatory research; patient participation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CanIMPACT Research Program Organizational Structure [25].
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Manafo E., Petermann L., Mason-Lai P., Vandall-Walker V. Patient engagement in Canada: A scoping review of the “how” and “what” of patient engagement in health research. Health Res. Policy. Syst. 2018;16:5. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0282-4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kendall C., Fitzgerald M., Kang R.S., Wong S.T., Katz A., Fortin M., Dionne E., Kuluski K., O’Brien M.A., Ploeg J., et al. “Still learning and evolving in our approaches”: Patient and stakeholder engagement among Canadian community based primary health care researchers. Res. Involv. Engagem. 2018;4:47. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0132-0. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bird M., Ouellette C., Whitmore C., Li L., Nair K., McGillion M.H., Yost J., Banfield L., Campbell E., Carroll S.L. Preparing for patient partnership: A scoping review of patient partner engagement and evaluation in research. Health Expect. 2020;23:523–539. doi: 10.1111/hex.13040. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hamilton C.B., Hoens A.M., Backman C.L., McKinnon A.M., McQuitty S., English K., Li L.C. An empirically based conceptual framework for fostering meaningful patient engagement in research. Health Expect. 2018;21:396–406. doi: 10.1111/hex.12635. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research . Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research: Patient Engagement Framework. Canadian Institutes of Health Research; Ottawa, ON, Canada: 2014. [(accessed on 26 April 2015)]. pp. 1–11. Available online: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48413.html.

Publication types

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources