The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Patients as Partners in Responsive Research: Methodological Notions for Collaborations in Mixed Research Teams
Abstract
Patients are increasingly actively involved in research. We depart from an approach that understands patient participation as dialogue. This idea is grounded in hermeneutic philosophy and responsive research. Patients are engaged in research via dialogues with other stakeholders. New is the inclusion of patients as research partners. Several methodological notions underpin responsive research. In two health research agenda-setting processes (intellectual disability and kidney disease), these notions have been applied and refined for collaboration with research partners in mixed research teams. The findings demonstrate that equal partnerships include involvement in all research activities from beginning to end, a focus on experiential knowledge, mutual learning, openness, and respect. Mutual learning processes help to overcome stereotypes and handle tensions. Other experiences include the financial reimbursement of research partners, and the necessity of an acceptable workload and scheme. The collaboration might then have a surplus value for the research process and for those involved.
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
A Ladder Of Citizen Participation
Arnstein, S. R. (1969) · Journal of the American Institute of Planners · doi:10.1080/01944366908977225 · Cited by 17,064
Cited by
Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: moving from theory to practice
Esmail, L., Moore, E., & Rein, A. (2015) · Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research · doi:10.2217/cer.14.79 · Cited by 502
Jivraj, J., Sacrey, L.-A., Newton, A., Nicholas, D., & Zwaigenbaum, L. (2014) · Autism · doi:10.1177/1362361314539858 · Cited by 95
Living with Parkinson's disease: Priorities for research suggested by patients
Schipper, K., Dauwerse, L., Hendrikx, A., Leedekerken, J. W., & Abma, T. A. (2014) · Parkinsonism & Related Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.parkreldis.2014.04.025 · Cited by 52
Self-citationWoolderink, M., Bindels, J. A., Evers, S. M., Paulus, A. T., van Asselt, A. D., & van Schayck, O. C. (2015) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.4817 · Cited by 38
LEYERZAPF, H., VISSE, M., DE BEER, A., & ABMA, T. A. (2018) · Ageing and Society · doi:10.1017/s0144686x16001045 · Cited by 33
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Abma, T. A., Nierse, C. J., & Widdershoven, G. A. M.
- Venue
- Qualitative Health Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 401-415
- ISSN
- 1049-7323 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7557
- OpenAlex
- W2135610135
- Cited by
- 225
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 23.91
- 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: Patients as Partners in Responsive Research: Methodological Notions for Collaborations in Mixed Research Teams. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1049732309331869
- The paper
- Abma, T. A., Nierse, C. J., & Widdershoven, G. A. M. (2009). Patients as Partners in Responsive Research: Methodological Notions for Collaborations in Mixed Research Teams. Qualitative Health Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309331869
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.