Table 3.

PAC members perspectives on barriers and facilitators to patient engagement in the RePORT project

Barriers encountered by the PAC	Facilitators identified by the PAC
The virtual environment made it difficult to communicate and engage	There were meaningful engagement opportunities for PAC members
Recruitment of diverse PAC members	The variety of perspectives on the PAC enhanced the research project. Monthly meetings were facilitated by a PRP chair to make sure that all voices were heard during these meetings
The difficulty of managing and scheduling a large group especially in different provinces and time zones	Flexibility of the project in terms of time commitment and what tasks to be involved in
Technical issues related to information sharing	Virtual meetings provide an opportunity for members from different locations (provinces) to meet
Clarity of roles within the project especially at the beginning	Communication within the team was good and created a collaborative environment. Challenges were addressed together as a team as they arose
Expectations of involvement in project were not always met for PRP	Capacity building opportunities for PRPs (workshops, training, mentorship) Contributions from PRPs were valued

Recommendations to other research teams working with PRPs
Offer capacity development opportunities for PRPs
Offer compensation to PRPs
Provide flexibility in the involvement of PRPs
Include PRPs from the beginning of project to foster patient engagement
Use established guidelines and procedures for engaging PRPs
Include PRPs from diverse backgrounds including ethnicity, gender, language, abilities etc
Involve PRPs as peer mentors and for recruitment initiative
Encourage open communication

PAC advisory council; PRP patient research partner