Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
Letters

Against patient involvement in clinical research

Maurice McGregor
CMAJ February 21, 2017 189 (7) E284; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.732496
Maurice McGregor
Professor Emeritus of Medicine, McGill University, Montréal, Que.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In a recent editorial,1 Kirsten Patrick propounds the view that patient involvement should be an essential component of clinical research. “Patients and their caregivers must be involved in decision-making at all steps in the research process, from design to choice of primary and secondary outcomes …” As an example of failure to do this, she cites a study2 that found that incentive payments to primary care physicians for providing care to patients with multiple chronic conditions did not have a significant impact on patients’ primary care contacts, continuity of care or management costs. Patrick criticizes the paper for the fact that “the outcomes were almost certainly not patient-relevant.” Surely that is a bit much. Why would this study, which was based on administrative data, need to refer to patients? In what way would it be improved by doing so? And, if the potential saving of millions of dollars to the health care system is not “patient-relevant,” what is? These pronouncements would not merit comment if they did not come from the deputy editor of the journal, who concludes her editorial with the warning that, “As we appraise research that is submitted to the journal, we will consider carefully methods used to involve public and patient representatives in design and implementation.” In other words, if you want to get published in CMAJ, make sure you list the names of representatives of the public and of patients among your authors or at least in your methods section. You will have to make up your own mind who representatives of the public are. Must they be elected? What distinguishes a regular author from a representative of the public?

I suggest that those who hold the incredible power to accept or reject our research submissions should leave the authors to decide how the research should be carried out, and judge the study solely on its quality.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None declared.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Patrick K
    . Realizing the vision of patient-relevant clinical research. CMAJ 2016;188:1063.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Lavergne MR,
    2. Law MR,
    3. Peterson S,
    4. et al
    . A population-based analysis of incentive payments to primary care physicians for the care of patients with complex disease. CMAJ 2016;188:E375–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 189 (7)
CMAJ
Vol. 189, Issue 7
21 Feb 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Against patient involvement in clinical research
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Against patient involvement in clinical research
Maurice McGregor
CMAJ Feb 2017, 189 (7) E284; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.732496

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Against patient involvement in clinical research
Maurice McGregor
CMAJ Feb 2017, 189 (7) E284; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.732496
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Realizing the vision of patient-relevant clinical research
  • Response to “Against patient involvement in clinical research”
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Response to "Against patient involvement in clinical research"
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Hospital-at-home programs in Canada: challenges and pitfalls
  • Author response to “Pitfalls of analyzing perinatal outcomes by health care provider”
  • Pitfalls of analyzing perinatal outcomes by health care provider
Show more Letters

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Patient-oriented research

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: cmajgroup@cmaj.ca

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire