Towards conceptualizing patients as partners in health systems: a systematic review and descriptive synthesis

Abstract Background With the sharp increase in the involvement of patients (including family and informal caregivers) as active participants, collaborators, advisors and decision-makers in health systems, a new role has emerged: the patient partner. The role of patient partner differs from other forms of patient engagement in its longitudinal and bidirectional nature. This systematic review describes extant work on how patient partners are conceptualized and engaged in health systems. In doing so, it furthers the understanding of the role and activities of patient partners, and best practices for future patient partnership activities. Methods A systematic review was conducted of peer-reviewed literature published in English or French that describes patient partner roles between 2000 and 2021 in any country or sector of the health system. We used a broad search strategy to capture descriptions of longitudinal patient engagement that may not have used words such as “partner” or “advisor”. Results A total of 506 eligible papers were identified, representing patient partnership activities in mostly high-income countries. These studies overwhelmingly described patient partnership in health research. We identified clusters of literature about patient partnership in cancer and mental health. The literature is saturated with single-site descriptive studies of patient partnership on individual projects or initiatives. There is a lack of work synthesizing impacts, facilitating factors and outcomes of patient partnership in healthcare. Conclusions There is not yet a consolidated understanding of the role, activities or impacts of patient partners. Advancement of the literature has been stymied by a lack of consistently used terminology. The literature is ready to move beyond single-site descriptions, and synthesis of existing pockets of high-quality theoretical work will be essential to this evolution

Plant diversity in different bioclimatic zones in Tunisia

The Republic of Tunisia, located in northern Africa, faces various environmental challenges caused by anthropogenic practices such as overgrazing, deforestation, and desertification. The conversion of natural ecosystems is the major cause of plant biodiversity loss. Tunisia can be divided into three main climatic zones as follows: a northern Mediterranean climate zone, a central steppe climate zone, and a southern desert climate zone. Because of this great environmental diversity, there are distinctive vegetation and various genetic resources in Tunisia. This research was conducted to investigate plant biodiversity within the various bioclimatic zones and to characterize useful plant resources in Tunisia. We investigated native, medicinal and aromatic, desert, and soil erosion control plant species

Development of the Engage with Impact Toolkit: A comprehensive resource to support the evaluation of patient, family and caregiver engagement in health systems

Abstract Introduction Recent shifts in the patient, family and caregiver engagement field have focused greater attention on measurement and evaluation, including the impacts of engagement efforts. Current evaluation tools offer limited support to organizations seeking to reorient their efforts in this way. We addressed this gap through the development of an impact measurement framework and accompanying evaluation toolkit—the Engage with Impact Toolkit. Methods The measurement framework and toolkit were co‐designed with the Evaluating Patient Engagement Working Group, a multidisciplinary group of patient, family and caregiver partners, engagement specialists, researchers and government personnel. Project activities occurred over four phases: (1) project scoping and literature review; (2) modified concept mapping; (3) working group deliberations and (4) toolkit web design. Results The project scope was to develop a measurement framework and an evaluation toolkit for patient engagement in health systems that were practical, accessible, menu‐driven and aligned with current system priorities. Concept mapping yielded 237 impact statements that were sorted, discussed and combined into 81 unique items. A shorter list of 50 items (rated 8.0 or higher out of 10) was further consolidated to generate a final list of 35 items mapped across 8 conceptual domains of impact: (1) knowledge and skills; (2) confidence and trust; (3) equity and inclusivity; (4) priorities and decisions; (5) effectiveness and efficiency; (6) patient‐centredness; (7) culture change and (8) patient outcomes and experience. Working Group members rated the final list for importance (1–5) and identified a core set of 33 items (one for each of the 8 domains and 25 supplementary items). Two domains (priorities and decisions; and culture change) yielded the highest overall importance ratings (4.8). A web‐based toolkit (www.evaluateengagement.ca) hosts the measurement framework and related evaluation supports. Conclusion The Engage with Impact Toolkit builds on existing engagement evaluation tools but brings a more explicit focus to supporting organizations to assess the impacts of their engagement work. Patient Contribution Patient, family and caregiver partners led the early conceptualization of this work and were involved at all stages and in all aspects of the work. As end‐users of the toolkit, their perspectives, knowledge and opinions were critical