Table 3.
Summary of consensus panel ratings on overall importance for the final 18 patient and family engagement indicators
| Patient and family engagement indicators | Round 1 remote panel rating (median score on 9-point scale and (IQR)) |
Round 2 online consensus meeting decision |
Round 3 remote panel decision (% of panellists voting to keep indicator) |
Indicator source (PPEET I=interviews C=consensus) |
| 1. Enough Information about the role | 8 (7–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 2. Clear understanding of the purpose of the SCN that I am a part of | 7 (6–9) | Keep, with edits | Keep (90) | PPEET, C |
| 3. Able to express views freely | 8 (8–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| Supports for engagement indicators (n=2) | ||||
| 4. PFAs have supports available for engagement (eg, technology, travel) | 8 (7–9) | Keep, with edits | Keep (80) | PPEET, I, C |
| 5. AHS resources for patient engagement are useful for partnering with patient and family advisors | No rating (not developed yet) | Newly developed derived from previous ‘Resources for Patient Engagement Indicator’ | Keep (80) | C |
| 6. Involvement of PFAs make a difference in the work of SCNs (answered by PFAs) | 9 (8–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 7. Involvement of PFAs make a difference in the work of SCNs (answered by SCN staff) | 9 (8–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 8. SCNs take the feedback provided by PFAs into consideration (answered by PFAs) | 8 (7–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 9. SCNs take the feedback provided by PFAs into consideration (answered by SCN staff) | 8 (7–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 10. Individuals engaging in SCN teams represent a broad range of perspectives (answered by PFAs) | 8.5 (7.25–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 11. Individuals engaging in SCN teams represent a broad range of perspectives (answered by SCN staff) | 8.5 (7.25–9) | Keep | N/A | PPEET, I |
| 12. Individuals engaging in SCN teams perceive the engagement as respectful and sincere to working together (answered by PFAs) | 9 (8–9) | Keep | N/A | I |
| 13. Individuals engaging in SCN teams perceive the engagement as respectful and sincere to working together (answered by SCN staff) | 9 (8–9) | Keep | N/A | I |
| 14. PFAs work together with SCN staff to design SCN projects (eg, in priority setting and planning, development of proposals) (answered by PFAs) | No rating (not developed yet) | Newly developed derived from previous ‘Working Together Indicator’ |
Keep (95) | C |
| 15. SCN staff work together with PFAs to design SCN projects (eg, in priority setting and planning, development of proposals) (answered by SCN staff) | No rating (not developed yet) | Newly developed derived from previous ‘Working Together Indicator’ |
Keep (95) | C |
| 16. PFAs work together with SCN staff to conduct SCN projects (eg, collaborate in data collection, analysis/interpretation, advising on project as it is carried out) (answered by PFAs) | No rating (not developed yet) | Newly developed derived from previous ‘Working Together Indicator’ |
Keep (79) | C |
| 17. SCN staff work together with PFAs to conduct SCN projects (eg, collaborate in data collection, analysis/interpretation, advising on project as it is carried out) (answered by SCN staff) | No rating (not developed yet) | Newly developed derived from previous ‘Working Together Indicator’ |
Keep (90) | C |
| 18. PFAs work together with SCN staff to disseminate SCN projects (eg, co-presenting at conferences, sharing work widely) | No rating (not developed yet) | Newly developed derived from previous ‘Working Together Indicator’ |
Keep (75) | C |
N/A=voting not required/applicable as PFE-I accepted in the previous round.
AHS, Alberta Health Services; PFA, patient and family advisor; PFE-I, patient and family engagement indicator; PPEET, Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool; SCN, Strategic Clinical Network.