↓ Skip to main content

Patient engagement in Canada: a scoping review of the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of patient engagement in health research

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#24 of 1,378)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
97 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
281 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
354 Mendeley
Title
Patient engagement in Canada: a scoping review of the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of patient engagement in health research
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12961-018-0282-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth Manafo, Lisa Petermann, Ping Mason-Lai, Virginia Vandall-Walker

Abstract

Over the last 10 years, patient engagement in health research has emerged as the next evolution in healthcare research. However, limited evidence about the clear role and scope of patient engagement in health research and a lack of evidence about its impact have influenced the uptake, implementation and ongoing evolution of patient engagement. The present study aims to conduct a scoping review to identify methods for and outcomes of patient engagement in health research. An adaptation of the scoping review methodology originally described by Arksey and O'Malley and updated by Levac, Colquhoun and O'Brien was applied. Sources from a formal database search and relevant documents from a grey literature search were compiled into data extraction tables. Articles were synthesised into key themes according to the (1) methods and (2) outcomes of patient engagement in health research. The total yield for the scoping review was 55 records from across Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. While evidence about the methods used to engage patients in health research is increasing, stronger evidence of specific patient and healthcare system outcomes is required. This necessitates further mobilisation of research that explores outcomes and that validates specific tools to evaluate engagement. Additionally, theoretical frameworks that can better inform and sustain patient engagement across the lifecycle of health research are lacking. Further increasing the volume and reach of evidence about patient engagement in health research will support the paradigmatic shift needed to normalise the patient's role in research beyond 'subject' or 'participant', so as to ultimately improve patient health outcomes and better address healthcare reform in Canada.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 97 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 354 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 68 19%
Student > Master 53 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 48 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 6%
Other 14 4%
Other 42 12%
Unknown 106 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 14%
Social Sciences 40 11%
Psychology 16 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 13 4%
Other 56 16%
Unknown 129 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 85. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 May 2023.
All research outputs
#493,445
of 25,295,968 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#24
of 1,378 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,859
of 450,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#4
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,295,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,378 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 450,203 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.