The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute
Open accessAbstract
PURPOSE: To provide an overview of PCORI's approach to engagement in research. METHODS: The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) was established in 2010 to fund patient-centered comparative effectiveness research. Requirements for research funding from PCORI include meaningful engagement of patients and other stakeholders in the research. PCORI's approach to engagement in research is guided by a conceptual model of patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR), that provides a structure for understanding engagement in research. RESULTS: To understand and improve engagement in research PCORI is learning from awardees and other stakeholders. Those efforts are described along with PCORI's capacity building and guidance to awardees via the Engagement Rubric. PCORI's unique model of engaging patients and other stakeholders in merit review of funding applications is also described. Additional support for learning about engagement in research is provided through specific research funding and through PCORI's major infrastructure initiative, PCORnet. CONCLUSION: PCORI requires engagement of stakeholders in the research it funds. In addition PCORI engages stakeholders in activities including review of funding applications and establishment of CER research infrastructure through PCORnet. The comprehensive approach to engagement is being evaluated to help guide the field toward promising practices in research engagement.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Community-based participatory research: assessing the evidence.
Viswanathan, M., Ammerman, A., Eng, E. M., Garlehner, G., Lohr, K. N., Griffith, D. M., Rhodes, S. D., Samuel‐Hodge, C. D., Maty, S. C., Lux, L. J., et al. (2004) · PubMed · Cited by 1,005
Reeve, B. B., Wyrwich, K. W., Wu, A. W., Velikova, G., Terwee, C. B., Snyder, C. F., Schwartz, C., Revicki, D. A., Moinpour, C. M., McLeod, L. D., et al. (2013) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0344-y · Cited by 845
Launching PCORnet, a national patient-centered clinical research network
Fleurence, R. L., Curtis, L. H., Califf, R. M., Platt, R., Selby, J. V., & Brown, J. S. (2014) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/amiajnl-2014-002747 · Cited by 637
Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework
Shippee, N. D., Domecq Garces, J. P., Prutsky Lopez, G. J., Wang, Z., Elraiyah, T. A., Nabhan, M., Brito, J. P., Boehmer, K., Hasan, R., Firwana, B., et al. (2015) · Health Expectations · doi:10.1111/hex.12090 · Cited by 628
The PCORI Perspective on Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Frank, L., Basch, E., & Selby, J. V. (2014) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2014.11100 · Cited by 583
Self-citationConcannon, T. W., Fuster, M., Saunders, T., Patel, K., Wong, J. B., Leslie, L. K., & Lau, J. (2014) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-014-2878-x · Cited by 468
Deverka, P. A., Lavallee, D. C., Desai, P. J., Esmail, L. C., Ramsey, S. D., Veenstra, D. L., & Tunis, S. R. (2012) · Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research · doi:10.2217/cer.12.7 · Cited by 358
Cashman, S. B., Adeky, S., Allen, A. J., Corburn, J., Israel, B. A., Montaño, J., Rafelito, A., Rhodes, S. D., Swanston, S., Wallerstein, N., et al. (2008) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2007.113571 · Cited by 348
Outcomes Research: Measuring the End Results of Health Care
Clancy, C. M., & Eisenberg, J. M. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.282.5387.245 · Cited by 324
Continuous Patient Engagement in Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abdulhalim, A. M. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.442 · Cited by 223
Cited by
Manafo, E., Petermann, L., Mason-Lai, P., & Vandall-Walker, V. (2018) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/s12961-018-0282-4 · Cited by 482
Harrison, J. D., Auerbach, A. D., Anderson, W., Fagan, M., Carnie, M., Hanson, C., Banta, J., Symczak, G., Robinson, E., Schnipper, J., et al. (2019) · Health Expectations · doi:10.1111/hex.12873 · Cited by 286
Heckert, A., Forsythe, L. P., Carman, K. L., Frank, L., Hemphill, R., Elstad, E. A., Esmail, L., & Lesch, J. K. (2020) · Research Involvement and Engagement · doi:10.1186/s40900-020-00227-0 · Cited by 130
Self-citationDe Meyer, D., Kottner, J., Beele, H., Schmitt, J., Lange, T., Van Hecke, A., Verhaeghe, S., & Beeckman, D. (2019) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.03.011 · Cited by 119
Seeralan, T., Härter, M., Koschnitzke, C., Scholl, M., Kohlmann, S., Lehmann, M., Eisele, M., Braunschneider, L., Marx, G., Scherer, M., et al. (2021) · Health Expectations · doi:10.1111/hex.13039 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Frank, L., Forsythe, L., Ellis, L., Schrandt, S., Sheridan, S., Gerson, J., Konopka, K., & Daugherty, S.
- Venue
- Quality of Life Research
- Published
- 2015-01-06
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1033-1041
- ISSN
- 0962-9343 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-2649
- OpenAlex
- W2011655883
- Cited by
- 288
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 58.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11136-014-0893-3
- The paper
- Frank, L., Forsythe, L., Ellis, L., Schrandt, S., Sheridan, S., Gerson, J., Konopka, K., & Daugherty, S. (2015). Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute. Quality of Life Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0893-3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
