Leading the Way: Advancing Patient Advocacy through People-Centred Care

Abstract

This article presents how the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario developed the People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition best practice guideline and describes its use in advancing patient advocacy by implementing the three guiding principles, two evidence-based recommendations and five good practice statements. Furthermore, the guideline equips leaders and organizations with implementation tips to promote patient autonomy, address systemic barriers, and foster inclusive, advocacy-driven care. We emphasize leadership’s role in fostering cultures of engagement, collaboration, and empowerment. This is a critical tool for organizations, leaders, and providers seeking to embed patient advocacy within practice and policy. It underscores the transformative potential of leadership-driven advocacy in advancing people-centred care and ensuring health systems prioritize the voices, needs, and experiences of those they serve.

Introduction

Over the past 20 years, there has been significant work to focus health and social services on people, including the relationship between providers and the people receiving care.¹ From this groundbreaking work, the concept of people-centred care emerged, urging health and social service providers to follow a person-led approach that considers the needs, preferences, and values of the person receiving care and the influence that family, the community, and society all have on health.²

People-centred care recognizes people, families and communities as “participants in, and beneficiaries of, trusted health systems that respond to their needs and preferences in humane and holistic ways.”³ The inclusion of families and communities, in addition to the person seeking care, necessitates a shift away from the terms “patient-centred care” and “person-centred care” which assumes a focus on individuals.⁴ A people-centred approach to care dissolves the paternalistic assumption associated with the biomedical model and the relegation of people to passive receivers of care.⁵ Instead, health and social service providers advocate for those accessing care to be treated as people who are capable of making informed decisions aligned with their preferences, needs, and values.⁶

People seeking health and social services have the right to and deserve a safe and positive experience. Indeed, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) position is that high-quality health and social care should be effective, safe, timely, efficient, equitable, integrated, and centred around the needs of people.² People-centred care is seen as foundational to quality health and social care around the globe.^1,7 When care aligns with a person’s needs, values, and preferences, it becomes more effective and leads to better outcomes for the people receiving care, and for health and social service providers and organizations.^1,7,8 When people feel respected and genuinely heard (and their health situation allows), they are more likely to actively participate in their care journey, follow treatment plans, advocate for themselves, make informed choices, and report higher satisfaction with their healthcare experiences.¹ This is why people’s experiences with the health system is one of the pillars of the Quintuple Aim and of evidence uptake and sustainability of social movements.^9,10 Based on a concept analysis, patient advocacy in health and social care is defined as the professional and ethical act of safeguarding, apprising, mediating, and valuing the people receiving care. In turn, people are empowered through support, representation, and action to uphold their rights, preferences, and safety.¹¹ Providers are in a unique position to support individuals in advocating for greater control over their affairs.

The Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO) recently published the 3^rd edition of the People-Centred Care Best Practice Guideline (BPG) that includes guiding principles, evidence-based recommendations, and good practice statements that promote cultural and equitable practices associated with people-centred care.¹² The purpose of this article is to describe how the BPG can be used to advance and strengthen patient advocacy and drive organizational culture change across the continuum of care. This article is divided into four core sections. First, we briefly highlight the rigorous methodology used to develop the guideline. Second, we discuss how the guiding principles can be embedded into organizational structures to support advocacy at both the organization and provider level. Third, we consider how the recommendations and good practice statements can be adopted to support advocacy at the provider level. Finally, we provide examples of implementation tips for both organizations and providers that can be used to operationalize advocacy.¹²

In alignment with the WHO and the People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition BPG, the terms “people” and “people-centred care” are used. Further, the term “leader(s)” is intentionally defined to encompass both formal and informal leadership roles within health and social settings. Formal leaders may include individuals such as nurse managers or clinical directors who hold designated leadership positions and are responsible for organizational oversight.¹³ Informal leaders are those who may not hold “official titles” but exert significant influence through their expertise, mentorship, or advocacy—such as experienced frontline nurses, patient champions, or peer educators.¹³

Methods

Between December 2022 and December 2024, a panel of 22 interprofessional experts from practice, research, education, policy, and people with lived experience was convened to update a BPG on person and family-centred care.¹⁴ The expert panel determined priority topic areas that the new edition guideline would address, as well as research questions and outcomes to guide the systematic reviews. Two systematic reviews were conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines¹⁵ and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023475962). For a complete description of the rigorous development procedures followed in the development of this guideline, please refer to the “methodology documents” tab at https://rnao.ca/bpg/guidelines/people-centred-care.

Search Strategy and Screening

Together with a health sciences librarian, the guideline development and research team conducted a comprehensive literature search for two recommendation questions. For recommendation question one, “Should decision aids used by health providers and people (to support shared decision-making about treatment and care) be recommended or not?”, a search for relevant quantitative studies published in English between March 2022 and February 2024 was conducted in the following databases: Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Medline, Cochrane Central, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, and Emcare. For recommendation question two, “Should sensory-minimizing strategies that address noise and light (used to facilitate people-centred care) be recommended or not?”, a search for relevant quantitative studies published in English between January 2018 and July 2023 was conducted in the databases, as well as in PsycINFO. In March 2025, the searches were updated using the same databases to retrieve articles published between July 2023 and March 2025. All studies were independently assessed for relevance and eligibility by two guideline development methodologists based on priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through consensus.

Data Extraction and Quality Appraisal

Two guideline development methodologists independently extracted data using a standardized Excel sheet (Microsoft® Excel® 2019 MSO (Version 2408 Build 16.0.17928.20114) 64-bit, Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA, USA).

All included studies were then independently assessed for risk of bias by study design using validated and reliable tools used for quality appraisal, listed in Table 1. If a discrepancy occurred between assessors during the appraisal process, consensus was reached on all scores through discussion.

Table 1.

Quality Appraisal of Included Studies

Type of study	Quality appraisal tool
Randomized control trials	Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 (RoB 2)¹⁶
Non-randomized studies	Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies for Interventions (ROBINS-I)¹⁷
Systematic reviews	Risk Of Bias In assessment tool for Systematic reviews (ROBIS)¹⁸

GRADE and Development of Recommendations

To determine the certainty of quantitative evidence for each prioritized outcome across studies and for each recommendation question, two guideline development methodologists applied the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.¹⁹ Following GRADE, five domains are assessed: risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, and publication bias.¹⁹

For each recommendation question, two guideline development methodologists collated information in an evidence-to-decision framework that was presented to the expert panel for feedback. For each recommendation, the evidence-to-decision framework detailed the magnitude of the problem, the balance of benefits and harms, the certainty of evidence, the values people place on outcomes, preferences for the intervention, and considerations for health equity. Preliminary recommendations based on this information were drafted by the guideline development methodologists and presented to the expert panel. The expert panel reviewed the evidence-to-decision frameworks and draft recommendations, finalizing them through consensus.

For more information about the guideline development process, including the use of GRADE methods and evidence profiles, refer to supplementary materials under the “methodology documents” tab on the BPG web page (https://rnao.ca/bpg/guidelines/people-centred-care).

Good Practice Statements

In addition to the recommendations, the expert panel identified and came to a consensus on good practice statements. Good practice statements are actionable statements that are deemed to be so beneficial that conducting a systematic review would be a poor use of time and resources.²⁰ These statements are not given a strength or level of certainty, but they are considered to have substantial benefits that far outweigh any harm.²⁰

Components of the People-Centred Care, 3^rd Edition Best Practice Guideline

A BPG was systematically developed to inform and enhance the provision of people-centred care across the health and social care continuum. The expert panel identified three guiding principles (i.e., cultural safety, trauma-informed care, and strengths-based nursing and healthcare), two recommendations (i.e., decision aids and sensory-minimizing strategies), and five good practice statements (i.e., therapeutic relationships, shared decision-making, advance care planning, plan of care, and virtual care). Implementation tips, supporting resources, and appendices are also included in the BPG to support implementation in practice.

Discussion

Advocacy is both a clinical skill and a leadership role competency that drives organizational culture re-design. The skills required to practice advocacy centre on an empathetic attitude, being responsible, and using assertive communication to support people with their decision-making.²¹ Advocacy is essential to improve a person’s experiences and outcomes of care, and to be effective requires an organizational culture that values and supports the tenets and attributes of people-centred care. Collectively implementing the guiding principles, recommendations, and good practice statements in the People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition BPG can drive a shift in organizational culture that values people advocating for, and being more in control of, their care.

Embedding Guiding Principles into Organizational Structures

The guiding principles provide an overarching philosophy that sets out a powerful tone for advocacy across the health continuum by shaping the values, priorities, and actions of leaders, health, and social service providers. When explicitly embedded into organizational structures, the guiding principles emphasize commitment to equity and inclusivity, trust and transparency, collaboration and shared decision-making; promoting policies that prioritize safety, empowerment, and cultural responsiveness. When leaders across health and social service organizations embrace these guiding principles and model them through their actions, it creates an environment where advocacy is enacted, not just spoken about or endorsed in statements—shaping decisions, policies, and care at every level. Below are examples of how embedding the guiding principles into organizational structures can cascade through all levels of the system.

1. Culturally safe practices recognize and address power imbalances in health and social care, acknowledging systemic inequities (i.e., racism and discrimination) and creating environments where people feel safe, respected, and heard.²² By recognizing and addressing power imbalances and systemic discrimination in health and social care, championing culturally safe practices and advocating for inclusive policies, leaders set expectations for behaviours and communications across the organization. This in turn powers health and social service providers to build trusting relationships with the people receiving care and provide holistic care that incorporates their cultural, spiritual, and social preferences, not just clinical needs.²³

2. A trauma-informed approach requires organizations to recognize the widespread impact of trauma and how it shapes people’s health outcomes and behaviours.²⁴ Policies must prioritize and reflect the value of people’s lived experiences, ensuring they are meaningfully integrated into the procedures and practices of health and social service providers. Only then can systems begin to foster environments that support trust-building and empower people to actively engage in their care. It is the onus of the organization, not only individual providers, to ensure trauma-informed care and advocacy are deeply rooted in the shared goal of promoting healing, empowerment, and dignity for people who have experienced trauma.

3. A strengths-based nursing and healthcare approach calls on organizations to prioritize people’s capabilities, resources, and resilience as opposed to their deficits or illness.²⁵ By embedding this philosophy into organizational policies and practices (e.g., staff training and education) organizations can foster environments that emphasize empowerment and self-determination. This commitment encourages collaborative partnerships and helps people recognize and build on their strengths. Through organizational efforts to cultivate confidence and self-efficacy, people are better supported in advocating for their own needs, wishes, and preferences.²⁵

Embedding guiding principles into organizational structures sets the foundation for advocacy by aligning care environments with equity, inclusivity, and empowerment.

Supporting Advocacy Using Evidence-Based Recommendations and Good Practice Statements

Integrating people-centred care into organizational structures fosters a culture that values lived experiences and advocates for individuals’ needs, values, and preferences. The five good practice statements and two recommendations outlined in the BPG provides health and social service providers with actionable statements that can be implemented to increase their competence and capacity for people-centred care, and develop authentic, advocacy-driven relationships with people. Table 2 highlights the alignment of the recommendations and good practice statements in the BPG with advocacy for people.

Table 2.

Using the People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition Best Practice Guideline to Advocate for People

RNAO Best Practice Recommendation or Good Practice Statement
Good Practice Statements
Good Practice Statement 1.0: Establishing a therapeutic relationship	It is good practice for health and social service providers to establish and maintain a therapeutic relationship with people and ground it in trauma-informed care and culturally safe practices, ensuring respect, trust, and collaboration.
	Effective advocacy for people presumes a respectful rapport with people, based on trust, compassion, humility and an ability to understand and attentively listen to the values, needs, and preferences of people.
Good Practice Statement 2.0: Shared decision-making	It is good practice for health and social service providers to participate in shared decision-making with people as they make informed decisions about their treatment, care, and services.
Good Practice Statement 2.0: Shared decision-making	Shared decision-making is foundational to providing a people-centred approach to advocacy by reinforcing the role of the person receiving care as an active agent in their health and care journey and safeguarding their autonomy.
Good Practice Statement 3.0: Advanced care planning	It is good practice for health and social service providers to regularly assess people for readiness for advance care planning and facilitate the process when ready.
Good Practice Statement 3.0: Advanced care planning	Assessing for readiness to engage in advance care planning enhances communication and trust between people and providers, respects the autonomy of the person receiving care, and promotes equity in end-of-life care, which extends advocacy for people through the care continuum.
Good Practice Statement 4.0: Plan of care	It is good practice for health and social service providers to collaboratively develop a plan of care with people that reflects their values, beliefs, goals, needs, attitudes, and preferences.
Good Practice Statement 4.0: Plan of care	Collaborative and consistent communication with people and their families or caregivers about their individualized plan of care cultivates ongoing advocacy for people.
Good Practice Statement 5.0: Virtual care	Where virtual care can be offered as an alternative to in-person care, it is good practice for health and social service providers to determine appropriateness and modality based on people’s care needs and preferences and to adjust as needs evolve.
Good Practice Statement 5.0: Virtual care	Harnessing technology, specifically virtual care, facilitates equitable people-driven care and supports shared decision-making and provision of advocacy for people, particularly those in remote areas or who are homebound.
Recommendations
Recommendation 1.0: Decision aids	The expert panel recommends that people are provided with decision aids to enhance participation in making decisions related to health screening and healthcare treatment options.
Recommendation 1.0: Decision aids	To support the advocacy of people, organizations can provide evidence-based decision aids, which facilitate informed choices and can be used to elucidate and communicate the values and preferences of the person.
Recommendation 2.0: Sensory-minimizing strategies	The expert panel suggests that people are provided with eye masks and/or earplugs as a sensory-minimizing strategy according to the needs and preferences of the person.
Recommendation 2.0: Sensory-minimizing strategies	Advocating for people by providing them with sensory-minimizing strategies to mitigate environmental noise can improve people’s healthcare experiences and facilitate their comfort and dignity during times of vulnerability.

Implementing Advocacy through Tools and Strategies

Advocacy can be operationalized through practical strategies spanning provider, organization, and system levels. The BPG offers implementation tips, supported by evidence from systematic reviews and/or the expert panel, that provide practical information for health and social service organizations and providers to translate the recommendations and good practice statements into practice. For example, good practice statement 4.0 states that health and social service providers collaboratively develop a plan of care with people. At the provider level, it is the onus of individual providers to ensure the plan of care is completed with the person receiving care, their chosen family, and all health and social service providers involved in the circle of care. At the organizational level, it is the onus of the organization to support implementation of collaborative care plans.

To further support implementation, the Leading Change Toolkit offers an evidence-informed methodology, based on the Social Movement Action Framework^9,26 and the Knowledge-to-Action Framework,^27,28 that leaders can use to effectively implement best practices. The recommendations and good practice statements from the People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition BPG can be operationalized at the provider level (leveraging intrinsic motivation to improve patient outcomes), the organizational level (updating policies to reflect best practice), and the system level (speaking out for changes to improve health inequities) by engaging people first and following an active process to create iterations of change. A powerful provider-level strategy is building capacity through best practice champions—trained peer leaders (e.g., point-of-care nurses)^29,30 who raise awareness about evidence-based practice, mobilize peers, and use change management processes and social movement action to influence uptake and sustainability of BPG(s) in their setting.³¹ Advocacy is a core competency of champions,³¹ enabling them to champion practice change(s) that promote social justice and people-centred care throughout health and social service organizations.¹¹

Contribution to Practice

This article contributes to the advancement of advocacy in health and social care by reframing people-centred care as an organizational duty, as well as a provider-level responsibility. It highlights the pivotal role of leaders in embedding the guiding principles, recommendations, and good practice statements from the People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition BPG into organizational structures and practices. By doing so, it strengthens system-wide commitment to equity, inclusivity, and empowerment and ultimately advocacy for people. Additionally, this article reflects a paradigm shift in terminology—from “patient” or “person” to “people”—underscoring a broader, more inclusive conceptual framework that is now shaping clinical guidelines and care delivery.

Conclusion

A people-centred approach to care supports and strengthens advocacy by promoting meaningful partnerships, shared decision-making, and respect for peoples’ values and preferences. With committed leadership support people-centred care can be embedded into everyday practice, policies, and structures—transforming organizational and health system cultures, creating care environments where advocacy is both supported and sustained. The People-Centred Care, 3^rd edition BPG’s guiding principles, recommendations, good practice statements, and implementation tips mutually reinforce one another and offer a cohesive foundation for practice that supports advocacy for people and the ability for people to advocate for their own care.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank UHN Health Search for developing the search strategies. The authors are also grateful for the expertise and guidance of the expert panel who assisted in the development of the guideline: Heather Thiessen, Kameel Abdul-Kareem, Sarah Benn Orava, Melissa Bush, Susan Dunn, Susan Gapka, Karen Hunter, Anshumi Joshi, Karima Karmali, Alifa Khan, Rev. Carmen Llanos Acero, Elisa Nigro, Alliah Over, Dr. Marie-Pascale Pomey, Sara Ryan, Dionne Sinclair, Tanya Smith, Susan Steels, Melissa Stevenson, and Jill Sullivan.

ORCID iD

Giulia Zucal

Ethical Approval

Institutional review board approval was not required.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work is funded by the Government of Ontario. All work produced by RNAO is editorially independent from its funding source.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The full methodology, PRISMAs, search strategies, and evidence profiles can be found in the “methodology documents” tab at .

References

Kitson

Marshall

Bassett

Zeitz

. What are the core elements of patient‐centred care? A narrative review and synthesis of the literature from health policy, medicine and nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2013;69(1):4-15. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06064.x

World Health Organization . WHO global strategy on people-centred and integrated health services. https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/155002/WHO_HIS_SDS_2015.6_eng.pdf;jsessioni. Published online 2015.

World Health Organization . Services organization and integration. 2024. https://www.who.int/teams/integrated-health-services/clinical-services-and-systems/service-organizations-and-integration. Accessed December 19, 2024.

Najafizada

Rahman

Oxford

. Analyzing models of patient-centered care in Canada through a scoping review and environmental scan. J Public Health. 2023;31(3):355-367. doi:10.1007/s10389-021-01528-8

Browne

Varcoe

Lavoie

, et al. Enhancing health care equity with Indigenous populations: evidence-based strategies from an ethnographic study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16(1):544. doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1707-9

Karazivan

Dumez

Flora

, et al. The patient-as-partner approach in health care: a conceptual framework for a necessary transition. Acad Med. 2015;90(4):437-441.

Lusk

Fater

. A concept analysis of patient-centered care: patient-centered care. Nurs Forum. 2013;48(2):89-98. doi:10.1111/nuf.12019

Santana

Manalili

Ahmed

Fairie

Kemp

. The role of patient-reported outcomes in person-centred care in Canada. https://cumming.ucalgary.ca/sites/default/files/teams/342/The_Role_of_Patient-Reported_Outcomes_in_Person-Centred_Care_in_Canada.pdf. Published online 2023. Accessed December 19, 2024.

Grinspun

Wallace

, et al. Exploring social movement concepts and actions in a knowledge uptake and sustainability context: a concept analysis. Int J Nurs Sci. 2022;9(4):411-421. doi:10.1016/j.ijnss.2022.08.003

10.

Nundy

Cooper

Mate

. The quintuple aim for health care improvement: a new imperative to advance health equity. JAMA. 2022;327(6):521-522. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.25181

11.

Abbasinia

Ahmadi

Kazemnejad

. Patient advocacy in nursing: a concept analysis. Nurs Ethics. 2020;27(1):141-151. doi:10.1177/0969733019832950

12.

Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO) . People-Centred Care. 3rd ed. North York, ON: RNAO; 2025.

13.

Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO), Healthcare Excellence Canada (HEC) . Leading Change Toolkit. 3rd ed. North York, ON: RNAO; 2021. https://www.RNAO.ca/leading-change-toolkit

14.

Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO) . Person- and Family-Centred Care. North York, ON: RNAO; 2015. FINAL_Web_Version_0.pdf (rnao.ca).

15.

Preferred reporting items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) website. PRISMA flow diagram. 2023. https://www.prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/FlowDiagram. Accessed May 17, 2023.

16.

The Cochrane Collaboration . RoB 2: a revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. 2020. https://methods.cochrane.org/bias/resources/rob-2-revised-cochrane-risk-bias-tool-randomized-trials

17.

Sterne

Hernán

Reeves

, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. Br Med J. 2016;355:i4919. doi:10.1136/bmj.i4919

18.

Whiting

Savović

Higgins

JPT

, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225-234.

19.

Schunemann

Brozek

Guyatt

Oxman

. Handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using the GRADE approach. 2013. https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html

20.

Dewidar

Lotfi

Langendam

, et al. Good or best practice statements: proposal for the operationalisation and implementation of GRADE guidance. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2023;28:189-196. doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2022-111962

21.

Heck

Carrara

Mendes

IAC

Arena Ventura

. Nursing and advocacy in health: an integrative review. Nurs Ethics. 2022;29(4):1014-1034. doi:10.1177/09697330211062981

22.

First Nations Health Authority (FNHA) . FNHA’s Policy Statement on Cultural Safety and Humility. FNHA; date unknown. https://www.fnha.ca/Documents/FNHA-Policy-Statement-Cultural-Safety-and-Humility.pdf

23.

Grinspun

Botros

Mulrooney

Sibbald

Penney

. Scaling deep to improve people’s health: from evidence-based practice to evidence-based policy. In: Transforming Nursing Through Knowledge: Best Practices for Guideline Development, Implementation Science, and Evaluation. Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario; 2018:465-494. Freely available from: https://rnao.ca/bpg/transforming-nursing-through-knowledge

24.

HealthCareCAN releases wise practices to address the health-related Truth and Reconciliation (TRC) Calls to Action. HealthCareCAN; 2018. https://www.healthcarecan.ca/wp-content/themes/camyno/assets/document/PressReleases/2018/EN?TRCCReport_EN.pdf

25.

Gottlieb

. Strengths-based nursing: a holistic approach to care, grounded in eight core values. Am J Nurs. 2014;114(8):24-32.

26.

Grinspun

Wallace

, et al. Leading change through social movement. Regist Nurse J. Spring 2020. Available from: https://rnj.rnao.ca/feature/leading-change-through-social-movement

27.

Graham

Logan

Harrison

, et al.

Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map?

J Continuing Educ Health Prof. 2006;26(1):13-24. doi:10.1002/chp.47

28.

Straus

Tetroe

Graham

. Introduction knowledge translation: what it is and what it isn’t. In: Straus

Tetroe

Graham

, eds. Knowledge Translation in Health Care. 1st ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley; 2013:1-13. doi:10.1002/9781118413555.ch01

29.

Ploeg

Skelly

Rowan

, et al. The role of nursing best practice champions in diffusing practice guidelines: a mixed methods study. Worldviews Evidence-Based Nurs. 2010;7(4):238-251. doi:10.1111/j.1741-6787.2010.00202.x

30.

Grinspun

. Transforming nursing through knowledge: the conceptual and programmatic underpinnings of RNAO’s BPG program. In: Grinspun

Bajnok

, eds. Transforming Nursing Through Knowledge: Best Practices in Guideline Development Implementation Science and Evaluation. Indianapolis, IN: Sigma Theta Tau International; 2018:3-27.

31.

Punia

Zucal

Julian

, et al. (under review) Powering champions to advance evidence-based practice: a scoping review and competency-based framework. BMJ Qual Saf.

Leading the Way: Advancing Patient Advocacy through People-Centred Care

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Search Strategy and Screening

Data Extraction and Quality Appraisal

GRADE and Development of Recommendations

Good Practice Statements

Components of the People-Centred Care, 3 rd Edition Best Practice Guideline

Discussion

Embedding Guiding Principles into Organizational Structures

Supporting Advocacy Using Evidence-Based Recommendations and Good Practice Statements

Implementing Advocacy through Tools and Strategies

Contribution to Practice

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

ORCID iD

Ethical Approval

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Data Availability Statement

References

Components of the People-Centred Care, 3^rd Edition Best Practice Guideline