Cargando…
Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research
OBJECTIVE: To count and describe the elements that overlap (ie, present in two or more) and diverge between models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research. Our specific research question was ‘what are the elements that underlie models and frameworks of patient engagement in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9396146/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35985787 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063507 |
_version_ | 1784771864797642752 |
---|---|
author | Chudyk, Anna Maria Horrill, Tara Waldman, Celeste Demczuk, Lisa Shimmin, Carolyn Stoddard, Roger Hickes, Serena Schultz, Annette SH |
author_facet | Chudyk, Anna Maria Horrill, Tara Waldman, Celeste Demczuk, Lisa Shimmin, Carolyn Stoddard, Roger Hickes, Serena Schultz, Annette SH |
author_sort | Chudyk, Anna Maria |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To count and describe the elements that overlap (ie, present in two or more) and diverge between models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research. Our specific research question was ‘what are the elements that underlie models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research?’ DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: On 6–7 July 2021, we searched six electronic databases (ie, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence Based Practice Database, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Scopus) and Google Scholar for published literature, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, Google, and key agencies’ websites for unpublished (ie, grey) literature, with no date restrictions. These searches were supplemented by snowball sampling. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included published and unpublished literature that presented (a) models or frameworks (b) of patient engagement (c) in health services research. We excluded articles unavailable as full text or not written in English. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data from included articles using an a priori developed standardised form. Data were synthesised using both quantitative (ie, counts) and qualitative (ie, mapping) analyses. RESULTS: We identified a total of 8069 articles and ultimately included 14 models and frameworks in the review. These models and frameworks were comprised of 18 overlapping and 57 diverging elements, that were organised into six conceptual categories (ie, principles, foundational components, contexts, actions, levels and outcomes) and spanned intrapersonal, interpersonal, process, environmental, and health systems and outcomes domains. CONCLUSIONS: There is little overlap between the elements that comprise existing models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research. Those seeking to apply these models and frameworks should consider the ‘fit’ of each element, by conceptual category and domain, within the context of their study. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9396146 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93961462022-09-06 Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research Chudyk, Anna Maria Horrill, Tara Waldman, Celeste Demczuk, Lisa Shimmin, Carolyn Stoddard, Roger Hickes, Serena Schultz, Annette SH BMJ Open Health Services Research OBJECTIVE: To count and describe the elements that overlap (ie, present in two or more) and diverge between models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research. Our specific research question was ‘what are the elements that underlie models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research?’ DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: On 6–7 July 2021, we searched six electronic databases (ie, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence Based Practice Database, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Scopus) and Google Scholar for published literature, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, Google, and key agencies’ websites for unpublished (ie, grey) literature, with no date restrictions. These searches were supplemented by snowball sampling. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included published and unpublished literature that presented (a) models or frameworks (b) of patient engagement (c) in health services research. We excluded articles unavailable as full text or not written in English. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data from included articles using an a priori developed standardised form. Data were synthesised using both quantitative (ie, counts) and qualitative (ie, mapping) analyses. RESULTS: We identified a total of 8069 articles and ultimately included 14 models and frameworks in the review. These models and frameworks were comprised of 18 overlapping and 57 diverging elements, that were organised into six conceptual categories (ie, principles, foundational components, contexts, actions, levels and outcomes) and spanned intrapersonal, interpersonal, process, environmental, and health systems and outcomes domains. CONCLUSIONS: There is little overlap between the elements that comprise existing models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research. Those seeking to apply these models and frameworks should consider the ‘fit’ of each element, by conceptual category and domain, within the context of their study. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9396146/ /pubmed/35985787 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063507 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Health Services Research Chudyk, Anna Maria Horrill, Tara Waldman, Celeste Demczuk, Lisa Shimmin, Carolyn Stoddard, Roger Hickes, Serena Schultz, Annette SH Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
title | Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
title_full | Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
title_fullStr | Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
title_full_unstemmed | Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
title_short | Scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
title_sort | scoping review of models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research |
topic | Health Services Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9396146/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35985787 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063507 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chudykannamaria scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT horrilltara scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT waldmanceleste scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT demczuklisa scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT shimmincarolyn scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT stoddardroger scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT hickesserena scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch AT schultzannettesh scopingreviewofmodelsandframeworksofpatientengagementinhealthservicesresearch |