Patient Engagement and Co-creation in Healthcare Services: A Scoping Review
Patient Experience Journal, ISSN: 2372-0247, Vol: 11, Issue: 3, Page: 215-245
2024
- 906Usage
- 2Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage906
- Abstract Views459
- Downloads447
- Captures2
- Readers2
Article Description
Objective: The objective of this review was to find literature related to the concepts of patient engagement and co-creation in healthcare services and identify models and/or frameworks that combined these concepts. Methods: We developed the eligibility criteria using the Population-Concept-Context framework applicable to studies with population of patients exploring the concepts of engagement and co-creation in the context of healthcare services. The search was conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, APA PsycINFO, and Ovid MEDLINE. We searched for articles in English with no search limitations on publication dates. Reviewers screened abstracts and full texts to identify articles for data extraction. We developed, piloted, and implemented a data extraction tool to extract key information needed to answer the research questions. Results: Our search yielded 3632 references. Fifty-five studies were included in this review with 26 studies in patient engagement and 29 studies in co-creation. Many identified studies explored the field of healthcare services research. We identified the common principles of patient engagement and co-creation along with the existing models and frameworks that were either applied to guide these studies or proposed through these studies. Conclusion: Though there were several models describing different components and phases of patient engagement and co-creation concepts, there was a lack of unified, domain-agnostic models that described characteristics of these combined concepts. This review suggested the need for an innovative conceptual model that would bring together the concepts of co-creation and the principles of patient engagement applicable to various activities in healthcare such as research, implementation, and evaluation.
Bibliographic Details
The Beryl Institute
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know