poster
Patient Involvement in CMAJ Publications From 2018-2020 | VIDEO
keywords:
publication metrics and performance indicators
editorial policies
diversity and inclusion
Objective Despite increased integration of patient, family,
and caregiver (henceforth referred to as “patient”)
perspectives in health care and research, limited information
exists regarding patient inclusion in academic publications,1
and medical editors remain divided about the
appropriateness of patient authorship.2 Understanding the
level of patient involvement can establish a baseline with
which to assess the success of future efforts. This work
examined the type and frequency of patient involvement in
works published by a general medical journal prior to its
adoption of a patient engagement policy.
Design In this cross-sectional study, articles (editorial,
research, guideline, clinical review, commentary, humanities,
analysis, and practice), podcasts, and blog posts published by
the CMAJ between 2018 and 2020 were analyzed to assess
how frequently patients were involved as authors, article
contributors (eg, as members of advisory panels or patient-
partnered teams), podcast interviewees, or subjects of patient
profiles.
Results Overall, 97 of 973 articles (10.0%), 18 of 175
podcasts (10.3%), and 28 of 323 blog posts (8.7%) reflected
patient involvement. The journal had published a special
supplement focused on patient involvement in 2018 and
launched a “Patient Portrait” series in 2020; these were the
only instances in which the CMAJ editorial team explicitly
solicited work involving patients. When articles published in
special supplements were excluded, 6.6% of articles (62/933)
involved patients. The highest rate of patient involvement was
seen in guidelines (85% 17/20), followed by commentaries
(21.4% 37/173 when including articles published in special
supplements and 1.5% 2/136 without), humanities (17.4%
34/195) (which included “Patient Portraits”), analysis (6.3%
3/48), research (2.4% 4/167), and practice (0.6% 2/312)
articles. No editorials or clinical reviews involved patients in
the period under study. Patient authorship was the most
frequent type of involvement (46/97 47.4% overall; 25/34
73.5% humanities, 16/37 43.2% commentaries, 4/17
23.5% guidelines, and 1/2 50.0% practice articles). Other
modes of patient involvement included patient-partnered
teams (39/97 40.2%) or advisory groups (35/97 36.1%),
incorporating patient preferences in methods (24/97
24.7%), patient profiles (8/97 8.2%), and mentioning
patient contributions in the acknowledgment section (7/97
7.2%). Most patient authors of humanities articles were
people who had worked in health care or research.
Conclusions At CMAJ, 10% of all published products
(97/973) from 2018 to 2020 reflected patient (including
family and caregiver) involvement. Overall, 6.6% (62/933)
occurred without the journal explicitly soliciting content
including patients. A large proportion of the articles that
listed patient authors were published in special supplements
or written by people who had worked in health care. These
data will serve as a baseline as CMAJ seeks to increase patient
involvement across the journal.
References
1. Price A, Schroter S, Snow R, et al. Frequency of reporting
on patient and public involvement (PPI) in research studies
published in a general medical journal: a descriptive study.
BMJ Open. 2018;8:e020452. doi:10.1136/
bmjopen-2017-020452
2. Cobey KD, Monfaredi Z, Poole E, Proulx L, Fergusson D,
Moher D. Editors-in-chief perceptions of patients as (co)
authors on publications and the acceptability of ICMJE
authorship criteria: a cross-sectional survey. Res Involv
Engagem. 2021;7(1):39. doi:10.1186/s40900-021-00290-1
Conflict of Interest Disclosures All authors are employed by
the CMAJ.