Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 28, 2025

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
06:16

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting

Published on: June 6, 2020

3.7K

Patient and public involvement in systematic reviews: frequency, determinants, stages, barriers, and dissemination

Qi Zhou1, Hongfeng He2, Qinyuan Li3

  • 1Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China; Lanzhou University, an Affiliate of the Cochrane China Network, Lanzhou 730000, China.

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|April 11, 2024
PubMed
Abstract

Insights

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in systematic reviews is increasing but remains low. Reviews with PPI show greater dissemination, particularly those led by researchers from high-income countries or involving methodologists.

Area of Science:

  • Health Sciences
  • Medical Research
  • Evidence Synthesis

Background:

  • Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) is crucial for relevant and impactful research.
  • Systematic reviews are a cornerstone of evidence-based practice.
  • Understanding PPI in systematic reviews is essential for improving research quality and reach.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To determine the frequency, influencing factors, and barriers of PPI in systematic reviews.
  • To assess the association between PPI and the dissemination of systematic reviews.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of 217 systematic reviews published in The BMJ from 2015-2022 with PPI declarations.
  • Multivariable analysis to identify determinants of PPI.
  • Evaluation of dissemination using Altmetric scores, citations, and full-text views.

Main Results:

  • PPI was present in 25.8% of reviews, showing a rising trend.
  • Factors associated with higher PPI included recent publication year (post-2019), involvement of methodologists, and lead researchers from high-income countries.
  • Reviews with PPI had significantly higher Altmetric scores and full-text/PDF views, but not citations.

Conclusions:

  • While PPI in systematic reviews is increasing, its overall frequency remains low.
  • PPI is more common in reviews led by researchers from high-income countries or involving methodologists.
  • Incorporating PPI enhances the dissemination potential of systematic reviews.
Keywords:
BarrierDeterminantDisseminationFrequencyPatient and public involvementSystematic review

More Related Videos

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting14:43

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting

Published on: January 12, 2018

11.8K
E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy06:28

E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy

Published on: August 1, 2019

8.3K

Related Concept Videos

Patient-centered Care01:13

Patient-centered Care

Patient-centered care involves delivering care beyond inpatient hospitalization. Reflective practice can enhance a patient-centered approach. Reflective practice is a process of reasoning that considers all aspects of the present situation, including practicalities, learning from personal practice, and consideration of patient needs. Patients appreciate care decisions made while considering their input. Involving the patient in their care provides the patient with a sense of contribution rather...
2.0K
Methods of Documentation III: PIE01:21

Methods of Documentation III: PIE

Problem-intervention-evaluation (PIE) is a systematic approach to documentation used in healthcare settings for clinical decision-making and patient care planning. It is a structured approach to organizing patient data based on problems, interventions, and evaluations. Here's a breakdown of its key features and considerations:
1.4K
Blind Procedures02:07

Blind Procedures

Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to control for experimenter bias. Experimenter bias refers to the possibility that a researcher’s expectations might skew the results of the study. Remember, conducting an experiment requires a lot of planning, and the people involved in the research project have a vested interest in supporting their hypotheses. If the observers knew which...
10.6K
Ethics in Research01:56

Ethics in Research

Today, scientists agree that good research is ethical in nature and is guided by a basic respect for human dignity and safety. However, this has not always been the case. Modern researchers must demonstrate that the research they perform is ethically sound.
23.0K
Guidelines for Writing Outcome01:11

Guidelines for Writing Outcome

When developing expected outcomes for a patient care plan, the nurse should adhere to the following recommendations:
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
2.8K
Ethical Standards II01:23

Ethical Standards II

Ethical standards are the backbone of nursing practice, guiding nurses as they interact with patients, families, and colleagues. These standards are crucial for providing safe, empathetic care centered on the patient's needs.
Nurses are entrusted with upholding various ethical principles and standards. Nurses forge solid therapeutic relationships using trust, empathy, autonomy, confidentiality, and professional competence.
Confidentiality is crucial, embodying respect for individual privacy...
662