The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patient participation: a concept analysis
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to present an in‐depth analysis of the concept of patient participation The analysis was undertaken using the method described by Walker and Avant Patient participation is defined and the critical attributes are identified Model, borderline and contrary cases illustrate what the concept is and is not The meaning of patient participation is compared with patient partnership, patient collaboration and patient involvement, three related cases The antecedents and consequences of patient participation are investigated to further refine the critical attributes Empirical referents are illuminated The value of concept analysis in relation to precise communication, critical thinking and the advancement of the knowledge base of nursing is discussed.
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
(1997) · Naming the Mind: How Psychology Found its Language · doi:10.4135/9781446221815.n7 · Cited by 15,148
Strategies for theory construction nursing
Hough, C. (1989) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/0260-6917(89)90137-8 · Cited by 2,308
Expanding Patient Involvement in Care: Effects on Patient Outcomes
GREENFIELD, S., KAPLAN, S., & WARE, J. E. (1985) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-102-4-520 · Cited by 1,413
Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications
Rodgers, B. L., & Knafl, K. A. (1994) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,121
A Contribution to the Philosophy of medicine: The Basic Models of the Doctor-Patient Relationship
SZASZ, T. S. (1956) · A.M.A. Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinte.1956.00250230079008 · Cited by 910
Theory and Nursing: A Systematic Approach
Pearson, B. D., Chinn, P. L., & Jacobs, M. K. (1983) · The American Journal of Nursing · doi:10.2307/3463398 · Cited by 664
Concepts, analysis and the development of nursing knowledge: the evolutionary cycle
Rodgers, B. L. (1989) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.1989.tb03420.x · Cited by 643
Collaboration: a concept analysis
Henneman, E. A., Lee, J. L., & Cohen, J. I. (1995) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.1995.21010103.x · Cited by 471
The Patient's Role in Clinical Decision-Making
BRODY, D. S. (1980) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-93-5-718 · Cited by 402
Nursing Theories: The Base for Professional Nursing Practice
Pridham, K. F., & George, J. B. (1986) · The American Journal of Nursing · doi:10.2307/3425023 · Cited by 331
Cited by
Charles, C., Gafni, A., & Whelan, T. (1999) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00145-8 · Cited by 2,333
Patients’ perspectives on person-centred participation in healthcare: A framework analysis
Thórarinsdóttir, K., & Kristjánsson, K. (2014) · Nursing Ethics · doi:10.1177/0969733013490593 · Cited by 132
Smith, E., Ross, F., Donovan, S., Manthorpe, J., Brearley, S., Sitzia, J., & Beresford, P. (2008) · International Journal of Nursing Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.09.010 · Cited by 113
Metadata
- Authors
- DipN, J. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Advanced Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-09
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 561-571
- ISSN
- 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2648
- OpenAlex
- W2020740250
- Cited by
- 306
- References
- 27
- FWCI
- 17.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Patient participation: a concept analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1996.22517.x
- The paper
- DipN, J. C. (1996). Patient participation: a concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1996.22517.x
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.
