Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization-and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review (Systematic Review)

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

Dukhanin Vadim; Topazian Rachel; De Camp Matthew

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: International Journal of Health Policy and Management Year:2018 | Volume:7 | Issue:10 Page(s): 889-903

Download Full-Text

View:

273

Download:

113

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization-and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review (Systematic Review)

Author(s)

Dukhanin Vadim | Topazian Rachel | De Camp Matthew | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

Patient Engagement

Patient Participation

Health Systems

Health Planning

Organizational Decision-Making

Abstract

Background: Patient, public, consumer, and community (P2C2) engagement in organization-, community-, and system-level healthcare decision-making is increasing globally, but its formal evaluation remains challenging. To define a taxonomy of possible P2C2 engagement metrics and compare existing evaluation tools against this taxonomy, we conducted a systematic review. Methods: A broad search strategy was developed for English language publications available from January 1962 through April 2015 in PubMed, Embase, Sociological Abstracts, PsycINFO, EconLit, and the gray literature. A publication was excluded if: (1) the setting was not healthcare delivery (ie, we excluded non-health sectors, such as urban planning; research settings; and public health settings not involving clinical care delivery); (2) the P2C2 engagement was episodic; or (3) the concept of evaluation or possible evaluation metrics were absent. To be included as an evaluation tool, publications had to contain an evaluative instrument that could be employed with minimal modification by a healthcare organization. Results: A total of 199 out of 3953 publications met exclusion and inclusion criteria. These were qualitatively analyzed using inductive content analysis to create a comprehensive taxonomy of 116 possible metrics for evaluating P2C2 engagement. 44 outcome metrics were grouped into three domains (internal, external, and aggregate outcomes) that included six subdomains: impact on engagement participants, impact on services provided by the healthcare organization, impact on the organization itself, influence on the broader public, influence on population health, and engagement cost-effectiveness. The 72 process metrics formed four domains (direct process metrics; surrogate process metrics; aggregate process metrics; and preconditions for engagement) that comprised sixteen subdomains. We identified 23 potential tools for evaluating P2C2 engagement. The identified tools were published between 1973-2015 and varied in their coverage of the taxonomy, methodology used (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed), and intended evaluators (organizational leaders, P2C2 participants, external evaluators, or some combination). Parts of the metric taxonomy were absent from all tools. Conclusions: By comprehensively mapping potential outcome and process metrics as well as existing P2C2 engagement tools, this review supports high-quality P2C2 engagement globally by informing the selection of existing evaluation tools and identifying gaps where new tools are needed. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration number CRD42015020317.

Cites

References

THE CHARTER ON PROFESSIONALISM FOR HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATIONS

Cite

APA: Copy

Dukhanin, Vadim, Topazian, Rachel, & De Camp, Matthew. (2018). Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization-and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review (Systematic Review). INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT, 7(10), 889-903. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/338613/en

Vancouver: Copy

Dukhanin Vadim, Topazian Rachel, De Camp Matthew. Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization-and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review (Systematic Review). INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT[Internet]. 2018;7(10):889-903. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/338613/en

IEEE: Copy

Vadim Dukhanin, Rachel Topazian, and Matthew De Camp, “Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization-and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review (Systematic Review),” INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH POLICY AND MANAGEMENT, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 889–903, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/338613/en

Related Journal Papers

No record.

Related Seminar Papers

No record.

Related Plans

No record.

Recommended Workshops