Abstract:Background: Studies have highlighted common challenges and barriers to patient engagement in research, but most were based on patient partners' or academic researchers' experiences. A better understanding of how both groups differentially experience their partnership could help identify strategies to improve collaboration in patient engagement research. Aim: This study aimed to describe and compare patient partners' and academic researchers' experiences in patient engagement research. Methods: Based on a participatory approach, a descriptive qualitative study was conducted with patient partners and academic researchers who are involved in the PriCARE research programme in primary health care to examine their experience of patient engagement. Individual semi-structured interviews with patient partners (n = 7) and academic researchers (n = 15) were conducted. Academic researchers' interview verbatims, deidentified patient partners' summaries of their interviews and summaries of meetings with patient partners were analysed using inductive thematic analysis in collaboration with patient partners. Results: Patient partners and academic researchers' experiences with patient engagement are captured within four themes: (1) evolving relationships; (2) creating an environment that fosters patient engagement; (3) striking a balance; and (4) impact and value of patient engagement. Evolving relationships refers to how partnerships grew and improved over time with an acceptance of tensions and willingness to move beyond them, two-way communication and leadership of key team members. Creating an environment that fosters patient engagement requires appropriate structural support, such as clear descriptions of patient partner roles; adequate training for all team members; institutional guidance on patient engagement; regular and appropriate translation services; and financial assistance. For patient partners and academic researchers, striking a balance referred to the challenge of reconciling patient partners' interests and established research practices. Finally, both groups recognized the value and positive impact of patient engagement in the programme in terms of improving the relevance of research and the applicability of results. While patient partners and academic researchers identified similar challenges and strategies, their experiences of patient engagement differed according to their own backgrounds, motives and expectations. Conclusion: Both patient partners and academic researchers highlighted the importance of finding a balance between providing structure or guidelines for patient engagement, while allowing for flexibility along the way. Patient or public contribution: Patient partners from the PriCARE research programme were involved in the following aspects of the current study: (1) development of the research objectives; (2) planning of the research design; (3) development and validation of data collection tools (i.e., interview guides); (4) production of data (i.e., acted as interviewees); (5) validation of data analysis tools (code book); (6) analysis of qualitative data; and (7) drafting of the manuscript and contributing to other knowledge translation activities, such as conference presentations and the creation of a short animated video.

Primary care involvement in clinical research – prerequisites, motivators, and barriers: results from a study series

Investigation and analysis of the factors of general practice research requirements

How can primary care be secured in the long term? – a qualitative study from the perspective of general practitioners in Germany

Prerequisites for providing effective support to family caregivers within the primary care setting – results of a study series in Germany

Regional and patient-related factors influencing the willingness to use general practitioners as coordinators of the treatment in northern Germany - results of a cross-sectional observational study

Physicians’ attitudes towards secondary use of clinical data for biomedical research purposes in Germany. Results of a quantitative survey

Expectations of general practitioners on a practice based research network in Germany- a qualitative study within the Bavarian Research Practice Network (BayFoNet)

Strategies to improve research capacity across European general practice: The views of members of EGPRN and Wonca Europe

[Patients' Predisposition to Participate in Clinical Trials at Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study]

Identifying key policy objectives for strong primary care: a cross-sectional study

Is there a relationship between attitudes of general practitioners/family doctors and attitudes of their patients regarding industry-sponsored clinical investigations? A cross-sectional survey in a convenience sample of doctors and patients across nine European countries

Engaging primary care professionals in OECD's international PaRIS survey: a documentary analysis

Appraisal of National Institute for Health and Care Research activity in primary care in England: cross-sectional study

Patient and researcher experiences of patient engagement in primary care health care research: A participatory qualitative study

Building an international network for a primary care research program: reflections on challenges and solutions in the set-up and delivery of a prospective observational study of acute cough in 13 European countries

Factors influencing the participation of gastroenterologists and hepatologists in clinical research

Somatoform Disorders in Primary Care-An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Study on Experiences, Challenges and Coping Strategies of General Practitioners in the Federal Republic of Germany

Barriers and opportunities for enhancing patient recruitment and retention in clinical research: findings from an interview study in an NHS academic health science centre

Optimising individual and community involvement in health decision-making in general practice consultations and primary care settings: A way forward

Factors influencing recruitment to research: qualitative study of the experiences and perceptions of research teams

Challenges in conducting clinical research in primary care dentistry