Litcius/Paper detail

Patient involvement in preparing health research peer-reviewed publications or results summaries: a systematic review and evidence-based recommendations

Lauri Arnstein, Anne-Clare Wadsworth, Beverley Anne Yamamoto, Richard Stephens, Kawaldip Sehmi, Rachel Jones, Arabella Sargent, Thomas Gegeny, Karen L. Woolley

2020Research Involvement and Engagement70 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are increasing calls for patient involvement in sharing health research results, but no evidence-based recommendations to guide such involvement. Our objectives were to: (1) conduct a systematic review of the evidence on patient involvement in results sharing, (2) propose evidence-based recommendations to help maximize benefits and minimize risks of such involvement and (3) conduct this project with patient authors. METHODS: To avoid research waste, we verified that no systematic reviews were registered or published on this topic. We co-created, with patients, a PRISMA-P-compliant protocol. We included peer-reviewed publications reporting the effects of patient involvement in preparing peer-reviewed publications or results summaries from health research studies. We searched (9/10/2017) MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and secondary information sources (until 11/06/2018). We assessed the risk of bias in eligible publications and extracted data using standardized processes. To evaluate patient involvement in this project, we co-created a Patient Authorship Experience Tool. RESULTS: All nine eligible publications reported on patient involvement in preparing publications; none on preparing results summaries. Evidence quality was moderate. A qualitative synthesis of evidence indicated the benefits of patient involvement may outweigh the risks. We have proposed 21 evidence-based recommendations to help maximize the benefits and minimize the risks when involving patients as authors of peer-reviewed publications. The recommendations focus on practical actions patient and non-patient authors can take before (10 recommendations), during (7 recommendations) and after (4 recommendations) manuscript development. Using the Patient Authorship Experience Tool, both patient and non-patient authors rated their experience highly. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a systematic review, we have proposed 21 evidence-based recommendations to help maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of involving patients as authors of peer-reviewed publications.

Topics & Concepts

Systematic reviewMEDLINEMedicineProtocol (science)Peer reviewGrey literatureMedical educationEvidence-based medicinePatient safetyEvidence-based practiceHealth careAlternative medicinePathologyLawEconomicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceMental Health and Patient InvolvementPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareSocial Media in Health Education
Patient involvement in preparing health research peer-reviewed publications or results summaries: a systematic review and evidence-based recommendations | Litcius