↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when, and how

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
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 (#33 of 1,769)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
61 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
262 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
451 Mendeley
Title
Patient involvement in clinical research: why, when, and how
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s104259
Pubmed ID
Authors

José A Sacristán, Alfonso Aguarón, Cristina Avendaño-Solá, Pilar Garrido, Juan Carrión, Alipio Gutiérrez, Robert Kroes, Angeles Flores

Abstract

The development of a patient-centered approach to medicine is gradually allowing more patients to be involved in their own medical decisions. However, this change is not happening at the same rate in clinical research, where research generally continues to be carried out on patients, but not with patients. This work describes the why, when, and how of more active patient participation in the research process. Specific measures are proposed to improve patient involvement in 1) setting priorities, 2) study leadership and design, 3) improved access to clinical trials, 4) preparation and oversight of the information provided to participants, 5) post-study evaluation of the patient experience, and 6) the dissemination and application of results. In order to achieve these aims, the relative emphases on the ethical principles underlying research need to be changed. The current model based on the principle of beneficence must be left behind, and one that upholds the ethical principles of autonomy and non maleficence should be embraced. There is a need to improve the level of information that patients and society as a whole have on research objectives and processes; the goal is to promote the gradual emergence of the expert patient.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 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 451 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 448 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 78 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 71 16%
Researcher 57 13%
Student > Bachelor 44 10%
Other 19 4%
Other 57 13%
Unknown 125 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 102 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 50 11%
Social Sciences 29 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 4%
Other 85 19%
Unknown 145 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 19 May 2022.
All research outputs
#760,738
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#33
of 1,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,567
of 315,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#4
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. 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 315,173 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 95% of its contemporaries.