Evaluating the Participatory Processes within the OECD PaRIS Project in Saskatchewan: Lessons Learned about Recruitment and Engagement

Objectives : To evaluate the participatory recruitment and engagement processes used in the implementation of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Patient-Reported Indicator Surveys (PaRIS) Project in Saskatchewan, Canada, and to identify lessons to inform future primary care data initiatives. Design : Participatory evaluation using a qualitative, interpretive descriptive approach, guided by a participatory evaluation framework grounded in relational equity. Setting : Ten purposively selected primary care clinics across Saskatchewan, including academic family medicine units, community health centres, a nurse practitioner–led clinic, and a northern group physician practice, representing urban, rural, remote, and Indigenous-serving areas in the province. Participants : Primary care practitioners (family physicians and nurse practitioners), clinic administrators and medical office assistants, and people with lived experience who were involved in PaRIS survey implementation and interpretation of clinic-level dashboards. Intervention : Clinic-level engagement with OECD PaRIS dashboards presenting aggregated patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), supported through relational, trust-based engagement, feedback sessions, and participatory interpretation. Primary and secondary outcome measures : Perceived effectiveness of recruitment and engagement strategies; experiences of dashboard interpretation and use; identified facilitators, challenges, and opportunities for improvement in participatory primary care data initiatives. Results : Early, trust-based engagement fostered strong clinic participation, a sense of co-ownership of data, and increased willingness to use findings for reflection and quality improvement. Participants described the dashboards as validating and empowering, particularly when supported by contextualized narratives. Key facilitators included relational transparency, clinic-specific feedback, and iterative feedback loops. Challenges included visual complexity of dashboards, limited access to comparative data due to embargoes, time constraints for team-based reflection, and reduced accessibility for some digitally underserved patient groups. Participants identified opportunities to simplify data visualizations, tailor dissemination formats, and extend engagement timelines, particularly when working with Indigenous communities. Conclusions : Relationship-driven, participatory approaches can meaningfully enhance engagement with PREMs and PROMs in primary care. Embedding relational equity throughout recruitment, data interpretation, and feedback processes supports co-ownership of data and strengthens its relevance for local quality improvement. Our findings offer practical guidance for designing inclusive, culturally responsive primary care data initiatives.