| REVIEW ARTICLE
|Year : 2023 | Volume
| Issue : 3 | Page : 153-158
Low degree of patient involvement in contemporary surgical research: A scoping review
ZM Mojadeddi, S Öberg, J Rosenberg
Center for Perioperative Optimization, Department of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Background: Patient and public involvement in research was introduced a few decades ago. However, there is still a lack of knowledge of the degree of patient involvement, particularly in surgical research. The aim of this review was to characterize the use of patient/public involvement in contemporary surgical research and to describe how patients were involved, if they gained authorships, and which countries studies came from.
Methods: In this scoping review, original studies and reviews about surgery were included that had patient/public involvement regarding study planning, conducting the study, and/or revising the manuscript. Screening was performed in the issues from 2021 of five general medicine journals with high-impact factors, also classically called “the big five,” and in the ten surgical journals with the highest impact factor.
Results: Of the 808 studies, 12 studies from three journals had patient involvement, corresponding to 1.7%. Patients were involved as participants in nine of the studies either in the designing of the study and/or in revising or approving the protocol; and in four studies in revising and/or approving the manuscript. One patient fulfilled the ICMJE authorship criteria and received a group authorship. Studies with patient involvement originated from six countries namely, Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, USA, and UK; with five studies from the UK.
Conclusion: Patient involvement is very low in contemporary surgical research. It is primarily in the study planning phase, authorship is almost non-existent and few countries publish such studies.
Dr. Z M Mojadeddi
Center for Perioperative Optimization, Department of Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*