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

Catherine Boden, Anne Marie Edmonds, Tom Porter, Brenna Bath, Kate Dunn, Angie Gerrard, Donna Goodridge, Christine Stobart.

Health expectations: an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy24(4), 1056–1071. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13279 FREE

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.

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.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *