public and patient involvement

公众和患者参与
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    先前的研究强调了新的被迫移民中重要的医疗保健获取和利用问题。我们旨在探讨公共和患者参与(PPI)在增强可及性和对移民健康研究的具体贡献方面可能发挥的作用。我们与来自瑞士厄立特里亚和叙利亚的寻求庇护者和难民进行了公开和深入的互动虚拟讨论。PPI的建立包括三个阶段:开始,培训和贡献。在培训之前,PPI的概念并不容易掌握,因为这是一种新方法——然而,经过培训和连续讨论,参与者热切地积极参与。我们得出的结论是,PPI在提高认识方面有希望,提高医疗保健系统的可及性和利用率,以及加强和加强移民健康研究。的确,PPI志愿者热衷于通过他们的网络提高社区的意识,并弥合研究人员与公众之间的重要鸿沟。
    Prior research has highlighted important healthcare access and utilization issues among new forced immigrants. We aimed to explore the role that public and patient involvement (PPI) might play in enhancing accessibility and specific contributions to migration health studies. We conducted open and in-depth interactive virtual discussions with asylum seekers and refugees from Eritrea and Syria in Switzerland. The PPI establishment consisted of three phases: inception, training and contribution. Prior to training, the concept of PPI was not straightforward to grasp, as it was a new approach-however, after training and consecutive discussions, participants were ardent to engage actively. We conclude that PPI holds promise in regard to raising awareness, improving healthcare system accessibilities and utilization, and enhancing and strengthening migration health research. Indeed, PPI volunteers were keen to raise their community\'s awareness through their networks and bridge an important gap between researchers and the public.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:与私人租房者和房主相比,更大比例的社会住房租户的身心健康状况较差。他们患呼吸系统疾病的风险也更大,心血管疾病,传染病的传播和死亡率。旨在减少健康不平等的一种方法是与服务不足的当地社区建立研究伙伴关系。我们的主要目标是与诺丁汉的社会住房租户建立研究伙伴关系,我们的次要目标是探索这些社会住房租户的健康优先事项,以告知未来的研究应用。我们还希望在社会住房背景下提供PPI的描述性过程,以供其他研究人员学习。
    方法:我们使用公众和患者参与(PPI)作为这项工作的基础,正如我们认为有社会住房经验的人,也是研究的最终用户,最适合告知我们最需要研究的领域。通过在线和现场焦点小组,我们和房客讨论过,统称为社会咨询小组(SAG),他们的健康问题和优先事项。他们一起提出了26个健康问题,与NIHR(国家健康与护理研究所)提供的22个资助机会主题相结合。目的是调查诺丁汉的社会住房租户的健康需求与NIHR的研究重点之间是否一致。一种优先排序技术(钻石九号)被用来总共排序,48个健康和福祉领域,三大优先事项。租户也有机会以其他方式参与公共卫生研究,例如审查本文和NIHR计划发展补助金申请,以扩大和继续这项工作。还为一个人提供了成为公共共同申请人的机会。
    结果:该小组优先考虑改善社会住房的质量,心理健康和医疗保健服务。这些与NIHR的资助主题之间只有一些一致性。其他因素,比如年龄和种族,还确定了个人健康优先事项。.当前项目的多样性和覆盖范围有限,然而,这是我们希望在未来通过更多的资金来改善的东西。我们了解到租户具有不同程度的流动性和技术能力,需要在线和面对面的会议。
    社会住房提供给那些在公开市场上买不起或租不起的人,与普通人口相比,更大比例的社会住房租户的身心健康状况较差。旨在减少健康不平等的一种方法是与服务不足的当地社区建立可持续的研究伙伴关系。我们的主要目标是让社会住房租户参与公共卫生研究,因为他们最适合告诉我们他们将从中受益的研究类型。次要目标是探索社会住房租户的健康优先事项,为未来的研究应用提供信息。我们还希望在社会住房背景下描述PPI的过程,以供其他研究人员学习。为了实现这些目标,我们与诺丁汉的一群社会住房租户建立了研究伙伴关系,并向他们介绍了他们想要改善的健康状况(即,他们的优先事项)。讨论最多的主题是改善心理健康的必要性,社会住房和医疗服务的质量,然而,这取决于种族和年龄。在这个过程中,我们学到了很多东西。首先,租户之间流动性和技术能力的结合意味着必须亲自和在线举行会议。这确保了他们仍然可以访问和方便。其次,我们了解到,面对面的会议应在中立的空间举行,以鼓励不同的小组成员参加。最后,总的来说,人们对这种伙伴关系非常热情,并致力于看到公共卫生的改善。因此,我们为该小组提供了更多参与研究的机会。例如,他们有机会为未来的研究应用编写和编辑非专业摘要,这是基于本文确定的优先事项。该小组的一名成员被提名为公共共同申请人,这将使我们能够在东米德兰兹郡增加住房工作的覆盖面。这也将使我们能够增加群体的多样性,目前,它主要由英国血统的退休女性组成。让公众参与卫生研究一直是这一进程的核心,在开展可获得的相关研究方面仍然很重要。
    BACKGROUND: A larger percentage of social housing tenants have poorer physical and mental health outcomes compared to private renters and homeowners. They are also at a greater risk of respiratory conditions, cardiovascular disease, communicable disease transmission and mortality. One approach that aims to reduce health inequalities is to create research partnerships with underserved local communities. Our primary aim was to develop a research partnership with social housing tenants in Nottingham and our secondary aim was to explore the health priorities of these social housing tenants to inform future research applications. We also hope to provide a descriptive process of PPI within a social housing context for other researchers to learn from.
    METHODS: We used Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) as the foundation of this work, as we believed that people with lived experience of social housing, also end-users of the research, were best placed to inform us of the areas with the greatest research need. Through online and in-person focus groups, we discussed with tenants, collectively named a Social Advisory Group (SAG), their health concerns and priorities. Together they raised 26 health issues, which were combined with 22 funding opportunity themes being offered by the NIHR (National Institute for Health and Care Research). This was with the purpose of investigating whether there was alignment between the health needs of Nottingham\'s social housing tenants and the NIHR\'s research priorities. A prioritisation technique (Diamond Nine) was used to sort in total, 48 areas of health and wellbeing, into three top priorities. Tenants were provided the opportunity to be involved in public health research in other ways too, such as reviewing this paper and also an NIHR Programme Development Grant application to expand and continue this work. One was also offered the opportunity to be a public co-applicant.
    RESULTS: The group prioritised improvements in the quality of social housing, mental health and healthcare services. There was only some alignment between these and the NIHR funding themes. Other factors, such as age and race, also determined individual health priorities. . The diversity and reach of the current project were limited, however this is something we hope to improve in the future with more funding. We learned that tenants have varying degrees of mobility and technological abilities, requiring both online and in-person meetings.
    Social housing is offered to people who cannot afford to buy or rent in the open market, and a larger percentage of social housing tenants have poorer physical and mental health outcomes compared to the general population. One approach that aims to reduce health inequalities is to create sustainable research partnerships with underserved local communities. Our primary aim was to involve social housing tenants in public health research, as they are best placed to tell us the type of research they would benefit from. The secondary aim was to explore the health priorities of social housing tenants to inform future research applications. We also hope to describe the process of PPI within a social housing context for other researchers to learn from.To achieve these aims, we established a research partnership with a group of social housing tenants in Nottingham and spoke to them about the areas of their health they wanted to improve (i.e., their priorities). The topics that were discussed the most were the need for improved mental health, quality of social housing and healthcare services, however this varied between individuals according to race and age. We learned several things throughout this process. Firstly, the combination of mobility and technological abilities amongst tenants meant that meetings must be held both in-person and online. This ensured they remained accessible and convenient. Secondly, we learnt that in-person meetings should be held in a neutral space to encourage different members of the group to attend. Finally, in general, people were very enthusiastic about this partnership and were committed to seeing improvements in public health. We therefore provided more opportunities for the group to be involved in research. For example, they were offered the opportunity to write and edit a lay summary for a future research application, which was based on the priorities identified in this paper. One member of the group was nominated to be the public co-applicant , which would allow us to increase the reach of this housing work across the East Midlands. It would also allow us to increase the diversity of the group, as currently it is made up of mostly retired females of British origin. Involving the public in health research has been central to this process and continues to be important in the production of accessible and relevant research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:不到1%的儿童和青少年健康研究报告青少年参与健康研究。这归因于研究人员和青少年在参与过程中遇到的障碍。为了解决青少年参与不足的问题,我们首先需要更好地了解阻碍青少年参与健康研究的因素。
    目的:我们对综述进行了综述,以巩固关于青少年有意义地参与健康研究的障碍的综述水平证据。
    方法:我们在PROSPERO(CRD42021287467)中预先注册了该综述综述。我们搜索了11个数据库;谷歌学者;和PROSPERO;通过手工搜索符合条件的评论的参考列表,相关期刊,472个组织的网站,和专家的意见。这导致纳入了99篇综述文章,探讨青少年参与青少年身心健康研究,它们是叙述综合的。青少年研究人员参与了审查的所有阶段。
    结果:我们发现,青少年参与健康研究受到研究人员和青少年所经历的一些挑战的阻碍。研究人员遇到的一些挑战是组织问题,其中包括有限的资源,守门和付钱的青少年。一些障碍与研究人员缺乏准备有关,包括缺乏对青少年参与的认识,需要培训和指导,以及对参与式研究的消极态度。青少年如何参与也存在障碍,例如研究人员发现适应新方法具有挑战性,招募和留住青少年的问题,包容性和可访问性。还有青少年特有的挑战,如青少年的技能和专业知识,培训,动机和学习目标。最后,与青少年道德参与相关的障碍包括权力动态问题,保密性,青少年的安全和保护。青少年报告的一些障碍包括象征性的参与,无法进入青少年的参与,和他们相互竞争的要求。
    结论:研究人员可能发现这篇综述有助于理解和规划青少年参与研究的潜在挑战。尽管已经确定了许多阻碍青少年参与的障碍,解决这些障碍的缓解策略很少。显然有必要建立有意义的青少年参与健康研究的最佳做法。
    青少年参与了这次综述综述的多个阶段。他们审查了协议,在标题和摘要筛选阶段筛选了25%的文章,筛选了10%的全文文章,从事数据分析工作。他们还帮助计划并与青少年咨询小组一起举办参与性讲习班,讨论青少年在健康研究中遇到的挑战。
    BACKGROUND: Less than 1% of studies on child and adolescent health report the involvement of adolescents in health research. This is attributed to barriers experienced by researchers and adolescents in the engagement process. To address this under-involvement of adolescents, we first need a better understanding of the factors that hinder adolescent involvement in health research.
    OBJECTIVE: We conducted an umbrella review of reviews to consolidate the review-level evidence on the barriers to meaningful involvement of adolescents in health research.
    METHODS: We preregistered this umbrella review of reviews with PROSPERO (CRD42021287467). We searched 11 databases; Google Scholar; and PROSPERO; supplemented by a hand search of the reference lists of eligible reviews, relevant journals, websites of 472 organisations, and input from experts. This resulted in the inclusion of 99 review articles exploring adolescent involvement in studies on adolescent physical or mental health, which were narratively synthesised. Adolescent coresearchers were engaged at all stages of the review.
    RESULTS: We found that adolescent involvement in health research is impeded by several challenges experienced by researchers and adolescents. Some challenges experienced by researchers were organisational issues which included limited resources, gatekeeping and paying adolescents. Some barriers were related to a lack of preparedness among researchers and included a lack of awareness of adolescent involvement, the need for training and guidance, and negative attitudes towards participatory research. There were also barriers around how adolescents can be involved, such as researchers finding it challenging to adapt to new methods, issues with recruitment and retention of adolescents, inclusiveness and accessibility. There were also challenges specific to adolescents, such as adolescents\' skills and expertise, training, motivations and study goals. Finally, barriers related to the ethical involvement of adolescents included issues with power dynamics, confidentiality, safety and protection of adolescents. Some of the barriers reported by adolescents included tokenistic involvement, inaccessibility of adolescent involvement, and their competing demands.
    CONCLUSIONS: Researchers may find this review useful in understanding and planning for potential challenges of involving adolescents in research. Despite many identified barriers to adolescent engagement, few mitigation strategies were identified to address these barriers. There is a clear need to establish best practices for meaningful adolescent involvement in health research.
    UNASSIGNED: Adolescents were involved at multiple stages of this umbrella review of reviews. They reviewed the protocol, screened 25% of the articles at title and abstract screening stage, screened 10% of full-text articles, and worked on data analysis. They also helped plan and conduct a participatory workshop with an adolescent advisory group to discuss the challenges experienced by adolescents in health research.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:我们描述了一系列人格障碍研究议程的主题,该议程最初是为2022年ESSPD边界线大会制定的。
    方法:具有生活和生活经验(EE)的专家,研究人员和临床医生几乎见面了,就人格障碍领域的研究课题进行了交流和讨论。专家-病人,亲戚,重要的其他人-命名了他们认为与该领域的进一步研究最相关的主题。这些主题已在2022年10月的ESPPD会议上介绍。
    结果:五大主题是:1.预防,早期发现和干预,2.症状改善之外的恢复,3.亲属参与治疗,4.性别不安,和5.耻辱。
    结论:一般来说,这些主题反映了当前的问题和社会价值观的变化。这些主题研究的首要目标是改善社会参与和社会融合,更好地传播研究,以及公众和政治利益相关者的更好信息。
    BACKGROUND: We describe a collection of themes for a research agenda for personality disorders that was originally formulated for the ESSPD Borderline Congress in 2022.
    METHODS: Experts with lived and living experience (EE), researchers and clinicians met virtually, exchanged ideas and discussed research topics for the field of personality disorders. The experts - patients, relatives, significant others - named the topics they thought most relevant for further research in the field. These topics were presented at the ESPPD conference in October 2022.
    RESULTS: The five top themes were: 1. Prevention, early detection and intervention, 2. Recovery beyond symptom improvement, 3. Involvement of relatives in treatment, 4. Gender dysphoria, and 5. Stigma.
    CONCLUSIONS: In general, the topics reflect current issues and changes in societal values. Overarching aims of research on these topics are the improvement of social participation and integration in society, better dissemination of research, and better information of the general public and political stakeholders.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景二次使用健康数据提供了推动医疗保健供应改善的机会,个性化医疗,比较有效性研究,卫生服务创新,政策和实践。然而,次要数据使用需要遵守相关法律,实施技术保障措施,伦理数据管理,尊重数据分享者。现有证据表明,公众广泛支持二次使用健康数据,这与对隐私的担忧共存,数据的保密和滥用。平衡保护个人的权利,防止使用他们的健康数据的社会福利是至关重要的,信任支撑着这个过程。该研究协议探讨了如何通过爱尔兰所有关键利益相关者团体建立公众对健康数据二次使用的信任和信心,发展一种促进安全和值得信赖的数据使用的文化。方法本研究将采用根据报告定性研究COREQ指南的综合标准进行的定性横断面方法。该研究的参与者将包括学者和研究人员;医疗保健专业人员,数据保护,道德和隐私专家和数据控制器;制药行业和患者和公众。将利用有目的和便利的抽样技术来招募参与者,和数据将利用焦点小组收集,可以补充半结构化访谈。数据将使用反身主题分析(TA)按主题编码,集体智慧(CI)将在分析后召集,与参与者一起探索初步发现。伦理和传播伦理批准获得了爱尔兰皇家外科医学院研究伦理委员会(REC202208013)。最终数据分析和发布预计将于2024年第一季度进行。调查结果将通过同行评审的期刊出版物传播,在相关会议上的演讲,和其他学术,公共和政策渠道。将为公众和患者参与(PPI)贡献者和公众设计摘要。
    Background  Secondary use of health data provides opportunities to drive improvements in healthcare provision, personalised medicine, comparative effectiveness research, health services innovation, and policy and practice. However, secondary data use requires compliance with relevant legislation, implementation of technical safeguards, ethical data management, and respect for data sharers. Existing evidence suggests widespread support for secondary use of health data among the public, which co-exists with concerns about privacy, confidentiality and misuse of data. Balancing the protection of individuals\' rights against the use of their health data for societal benefits is of vital importance, and trust underpins this process. The study protocol explores how to build public trust and confidence in the secondary use of health data through all key stakeholder groups in Ireland, towards developing a culture that promotes a safe and trustworthy use of data. Methods  This study will adopt a qualitative cross-sectional approach conducted in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research COREQ guidelines. Participants in the study will include academics and researchers; healthcare professionals, data protection, ethics and privacy experts and data controllers; pharmaceutical industry and patients and public. Purposive and convenience sampling techniques will be utilised to recruit the participants, and data will be collected utilizing focus groups that may be supplemented with semi-structured interviews. Data will be coded by themes using reflexive thematic analysis (TA) and collective intelligence (CI) will be convened post-analysis to explore the preliminary findings with the participants. Ethics and Dissemination  Ethical approval was obtained from the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Research Ethics Committee (REC202208013). Final data analysis and dissemination is expected by Q1 2024. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications, presentations at relevant conferences, and other academic, public and policy channels. Lay summaries will be designed for Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) contributors and general public.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:参与式研究(PR)涉及在整个研究过程中与最终用户和相关利益相关者进行共同创造,旨在在最终用户和研究团队之间公平分配电力。已证明缺乏对先前工作场所健康促进(WHP)研究的参与度和依从性。通过实施公关方法,在共同设计可行和可接受的干预策略时,寻求最终用户和利益相关者的见解,从而增加了研究的相关性。
    目的:本范围审查旨在探讨,identify,并将PR技术及其影响用于基于办公室的WHP干预措施,旨在改善身体活动(PA)或减少久坐行为(SB)。
    方法:本范围审查报告遵循PRISMA-ScR(系统审查和Meta分析扩展的首选报告项目)。5个电子数据库的系统文献检索-WebofScience,PubMed,Scopus,谷歌学者,和OpenGrey-进行,搜索从1995年1月1日至2023年2月8日。总的来说,两名独立审稿人首先按标题和摘要筛选检索到的文章,然后根据纳入和排除标准对全文进行评估。搜索策略和资格标准是由先验人群(以办公室为基础的工作成年人)制定和指导的,干预(采用PR方法的PAWHP干预),比较(不需要比较),和结果(PA或SB)框架。数据通过叙事综合绘制和讨论,并进行了专题分析。纳入的研究评估了整个研究过程中最终用户的参与程度和研究人员分享的权力。利用阿恩斯坦的公民参与阶梯。
    结果:搜索检索到376条记录,其中8人(2.1%)符合纳入标准。确定了四个关键战略:(1)最终用户焦点小组,(2)管理层参与,(3)研究员主持人,和(4)工作场所冠军。参与度和权力共享的程度相对较低,25%(2/8)的研究被确定为非参与研究,25%(2/8)被确定为象征性的,50%(4/8)决心提供公民权力。
    结论:本综述为采用PR方法时的当前实践提供了证据基础,强调以前基于办公室的PAWHP研究在很大程度上是象征性的或非参与性的,并确定最终用户仅参与WHP研究的概念和实施。然而,在纳入的研究中观察到PA的积极改善和SB的降低,这在很大程度上归因于实施PR方法,并将最终用户纳入WHP干预措施的设计。未来的研究应旨在与工作场所合作,通过提供公民控制并让最终用户“拥有”可持续WHP干预的研究来建设能力并赋予劳动力权力。
    RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054402。
    BACKGROUND: Participatory research (PR) involves engaging in cocreation with end users and relevant stakeholders throughout the research process, aiming to distribute power equitably between the end users and research team. Engagement and adherence in previous workplace health promotion (WHP) studies have been shown to be lacking. By implementing a PR approach, the insights of end users and stakeholders are sought in the co-design of feasible and acceptable intervention strategies, thereby increasing the relevance of the research.
    OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to explore, identify, and map PR techniques and their impact when used in office-based WHP interventions designed to improve physical activity (PA) or reduce sedentary behavior (SB).
    METHODS: The reporting of this scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). A systematic literature search of 5 electronic databases-Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and OpenGrey-was conducted, searching from January 1, 1995, to February 8, 2023. In total, 2 independent reviewers first screened the retrieved articles by title and abstract, and then assessed the full texts based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The search strategy and eligibility criteria were developed and guided by an a priori population (office-based working adults), intervention (a PA WHP intervention that took a PR approach), comparison (no comparison required), and outcome (PA or SB) framework. Data were charted and discussed via a narrative synthesis, and a thematic analysis was conducted. The included studies were evaluated regarding the degree of end user engagement throughout the research process and power shared by the researchers, using Arnstein\'s ladder of citizen participation.
    RESULTS: The search retrieved 376 records, of which 8 (2.1%) met the inclusion criteria. Four key strategies were identified: (1) end user focus groups, (2) management involvement, (3) researcher facilitators, and (4) workplace champions. The degree of engagement and power shared was relatively low, with 25% (2/8) of the studies determined to be nonparticipation studies, 25% (2/8) determined to be tokenistic, and 50% (4/8) determined to provide citizen power.
    CONCLUSIONS: This review provides a foundation of evidence on the current practices when taking a PR approach, highlighting that previous office-based PA WHP studies have been largely tokenistic or nonparticipative, and identified that the end user is only engaged with in the conception and implementation of the WHP studies. However, a positive improvement in PA and reduction in SB were observed in the included studies, which were largely attributed to implementing a PR approach and including the end user in the design of the WHP intervention. Future studies should aim to collaborate with workplaces, building capacity and empowering the workforce by providing citizen control and letting the end users \"own\" the research for a sustainable WHP intervention.
    UNASSIGNED: RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054402.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:青少年有意义地参与健康研究是他们的基本人权,并且有很多好处。研究人员对如何使青少年有意义地参与健康研究缺乏认识,这与青少年参与健康研究有关。为了解决这个障碍,研究报告说需要更多的指导。为制定关于青少年参与的更好准则提供信息,有必要首先巩固目前可用的关于青少年参与健康研究的指南,并找出这些指南中的差距。这篇综述旨在系统地确定目前所有关于青少年参与健康研究的指南,并评估其范围。内容,context,和质量。
    方法:此快速综述已在PROSPERO#CRD42021293586中预先注册。它包括纳入关于青少年参与健康研究的具体建议的文件。我们搜索了六个数据库的同行评审文献:MEDLINE,CINAHL,Embase,Scopus,WebofScience,和ERIC。我们在谷歌学者中进行了灰色文献搜索,Google,472个相关组织的网站,并寻求专家意见。使用评估和评估指南(AGREE-II)工具评估指南的质量。使用描述性分析和叙述性综合对数据进行分析。
    结果:我们发现,当前有关青少年参与健康研究的指南范围通常很窄,针对特定用户和人群,同时专注于有限的研究领域。该指南单独未能全面涵盖与青少年研究参与有关的所有主题的建议,在所有包含的准则中共同处理。此外,这些指南往往是针对具体情况的,质量通常很低,通常是由于利益相关者参与不足和缺乏严格的开发方法。
    结论:这篇综述提供了关于青少年参与健康研究的指南的综合列表,以及他们的质量分数,作为研究人员选择适合其研究课题的指南的资源,context,和青少年参与的范围。有必要制定一套关于青少年参与研究的指导方针,范围广泛,涵盖青少年参与健康研究的所有关键方面,可以适应不同的环境,基于严格和系统的方法。
    青少年研究人员D.B.和C.W.参与审查过程的不同阶段。D.B.在标题和摘要筛选阶段筛选了25%的同行评审文章,在全文筛选阶段筛选了10%。C.W.从10%的纳入指南中提取数据。两位共同研究人员回顾并分享了他们对这篇文章的反馈,并且是这篇论文的共同作者。还将邀请他们为进一步传播本次审查的结果做出贡献。
    BACKGROUND: Meaningful involvement of adolescents in health research is their fundamental human right and has many benefits. A lack of awareness among researchers on how to meaningfully involve adolescents in health research has been linked to adolescent under involvement in health research. To address this barrier, studies have reported the need for more guidance. To inform the development of better guidelines on adolescent involvement, there is a need to first consolidate the currently available guidance on adolescent involvement in health research and to identify the gaps in these guidelines. This review aims to systematically identify all the currently available guidelines on adolescent involvement in health research and evaluate their scope, content, context, and quality.
    METHODS: This rapid review was pre-registered with PROSPERO #CRD42021293586. It included documents that incorporated tangible recommendations on the involvement of adolescents in health research. We searched six databases for peer-reviewed literature: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ERIC. We conducted a grey literature search in Google Scholar, Google, websites of 472 relevant organisations and sought expert input. The quality of the guidelines was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch & Evaluation (AGREE-II) Instrument. Data was analysed using descriptive analyses and narrative synthesis.
    RESULTS: We found that the current guidelines on adolescent involvement in health research are often narrow in scope, targeting specific users and populations while focusing on limited research areas. The guidelines individually fail to provide comprehensive coverage of recommendations across all topics related to adolescent research involvement, that are collectively addressed across all included guidelines. Furthermore, these guidelines tend to be context-specific and are generally of low quality, often due to inadequate stakeholder involvement and a lack of rigorous development methods.
    CONCLUSIONS: This review provides a consolidated list of guidelines on adolescent involvement in health research along with their quality scores as a resource for researchers to select the guidelines suitable for their research topic, context, and scope for adolescent involvement. There is a need to develop a set of guidelines on adolescent involvement in research, which are comprehensive in scope, cover all key aspects of adolescent involvement in health research, can be adapted for different contexts, and which are based on rigorous and systematic methods.
    UNASSIGNED: Adolescent co-researchers D. B. and C. W. were involved at different stages of the review process. D. B. screened 25% of the peer-reviewed articles at the title and abstract screening stage and 10% at full-text screening stage. C. W. extracted data from 10% of the included guidelines. Both co-researchers reviewed and shared their feedback on the article and are co-authors on this paper. They will also be invited to contribute to further dissemination of the findings from this review.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:在研究中使用患者和公众参与(PPI)来提高医疗保健质量的兴趣越来越大。通常,传统的方法已经被使用,如访谈或焦点小组。然而,这些方法往往会吸引类似的人群。因此,正在开发创造性的方法,使传统方法无法获得或无法参与的患者参与其中。
    目的:确定在健康和社会护理研究中使用创造性PPI方法的优势和局限性。
    方法:电子搜索于2023年4月14日在五个数据库上进行(WebofScience,PubMed,ASSIA,CINAHL,科克伦图书馆)。涉及传统的研究,非创造性PPI方法被排除.创造性的PPI方法被用来与作为研究顾问的人互动,而不是研究参与者。仅接受2009年以来以英语发布的主要数据。Title,在使用归纳主题分析生成主题之前,由两名独立的审稿人进行摘要和全文筛选。
    结果:12篇论文符合纳入标准。使用的创作方法包括歌曲,诗,图纸,照片启发,戏剧表演,可视化,社交媒体,摄影,原型开发,文化动画,卡片分类和角色开发。分析确定了创造性方法的四个局限性和五个优势。限制包括创造性PPI的时间和资源密集型性质,缺乏对更广泛人群和道德问题的概括。外部因素,例如缺乏支持创造性PPI的基础设施,也影响了其实施。优势包括破坏权力层次结构,并为人们提供一个安全的空间来表达平凡或“禁忌”主题。创造性的方法也很吸引人,包容那些努力参与传统PPI的人,也可以节约成本和时间。
    结论:“CreativePPI”是一个总称,包含许多不同的参与方法,每种方法都有优势和局限性。选择哪一个应该由研究的目的和要求决定,以及PPI组的特点和实际局限性。创造性的PPI可以比更传统的方法更有利,然而,可以考虑采用混合方法来获得两者的好处。创造性的PPI方法没有被广泛使用;然而,随着PPI更多地嵌入到研究中,这种情况可能会随着时间的推移而改变。
    重要的是,从最初的头脑风暴开始,就将患者和公众纳入研究过程。从设计到交付。这被称为公共和患者参与(PPI)。他们的投入意味着研究与他们的需求和需求密切相关。传统上为了获得这种输入,进行访谈和小组讨论,但这可以排除那些认为这些活动不参与或无法访问的人,例如那些有语言挑战的人,学习障碍或记忆问题。PPI的创造性方法可以克服这一点。这是一个宽泛的术语,描述了让患者和公众参与研究的不同(非传统)方式,例如通过使用或艺术,动画或表演。这篇评论调查了在健康和社会护理研究中,PPI的创造性方法可能很困难(局限性)或有帮助(优势)的原因。在搜索了5个在线数据库后,该综述包括12项研究。PPI组包括成年人,儿童和有语言和记忆障碍的人。创作方法包括歌曲,诗,图纸,使用照片和戏剧,可视化,Facebook,创建原型,人物角色和卡片分类。限制包括时间,与创造性方法相关的成本和努力,缺乏对其他人群的应用,伦理问题和更广泛的研究界的买入。优势包括学者和公众之间的平等感,为人们创造一个表达自己的安全空间,包容性,创造性的PPI可以节约成本和时间。总的来说,这篇综述表明,创造性的PPI是值得的,然而,每种方法都有其自身的优势和局限性,其选择将取决于研究项目,PPI组特点和其他实际局限性,例如时间和资金限制。
    BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in using patient and public involvement (PPI) in research to improve the quality of healthcare. Ordinarily, traditional methods have been used such as interviews or focus groups. However, these methods tend to engage a similar demographic of people. Thus, creative methods are being developed to involve patients for whom traditional methods are inaccessible or non-engaging.
    OBJECTIVE: To determine the strengths and limitations to using creative PPI methods in health and social care research.
    METHODS: Electronic searches were conducted over five databases on 14th April 2023 (Web of Science, PubMed, ASSIA, CINAHL, Cochrane Library). Studies that involved traditional, non-creative PPI methods were excluded. Creative PPI methods were used to engage with people as research advisors, rather than study participants. Only primary data published in English from 2009 were accepted. Title, abstract and full text screening was undertaken by two independent reviewers before inductive thematic analysis was used to generate themes.
    RESULTS: Twelve papers met the inclusion criteria. The creative methods used included songs, poems, drawings, photograph elicitation, drama performance, visualisations, social media, photography, prototype development, cultural animation, card sorting and persona development. Analysis identified four limitations and five strengths to the creative approaches. Limitations included the time and resource intensive nature of creative PPI, the lack of generalisation to wider populations and ethical issues. External factors, such as the lack of infrastructure to support creative PPI, also affected their implementation. Strengths included the disruption of power hierarchies and the creation of a safe space for people to express mundane or \"taboo\" topics. Creative methods are also engaging, inclusive of people who struggle to participate in traditional PPI and can also be cost and time efficient.
    CONCLUSIONS: \'Creative PPI\' is an umbrella term encapsulating many different methods of engagement and there are strengths and limitations to each. The choice of which should be determined by the aims and requirements of the research, as well as the characteristics of the PPI group and practical limitations. Creative PPI can be advantageous over more traditional methods, however a hybrid approach could be considered to reap the benefits of both. Creative PPI methods are not widely used; however, this could change over time as PPI becomes embedded even more into research.
    It is important that patients and public are included in the research process from initial brainstorming, through design to delivery. This is known as public and patient involvement (PPI). Their input means that research closely aligns with their wants and needs. Traditionally to get this input, interviews and group discussions are held, but this can exclude people who find these activities non-engaging or inaccessible, for example those with language challenges, learning disabilities or memory issues. Creative methods of PPI can overcome this. This is a broad term describing different (non-traditional) ways of engaging patients and public in research, such as through the use or art, animation or performance. This review investigated the reasons why creative approaches to PPI could be difficult (limitations) or helpful (strengths) in health and social care research. After searching 5 online databases, 12 studies were included in the review. PPI groups included adults, children and people with language and memory impairments. Creative methods included songs, poems, drawings, the use of photos and drama, visualisations, Facebook, creating prototypes, personas and card sorting. Limitations included the time, cost and effort associated with creative methods, the lack of application to other populations, ethical issues and buy-in from the wider research community. Strengths included the feeling of equality between academics and the public, creation of a safe space for people to express themselves, inclusivity, and that creative PPI can be cost and time efficient. Overall, this review suggests that creative PPI is worthwhile, however each method has its own strengths and limitations and the choice of which will depend on the research project, PPI group characteristics and other practical limitations, such as time and financial constraints.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:痴呆症是一个全球性的公共卫生挑战。证据表明,来自南亚社区的个体是痴呆症的高危人群,部分是由于早期和累积暴露于已知的痴呆危险因素,如肥胖和2型糖尿病。需要在文化上更适当的社区参与,以提高对痴呆症的认识,并确定更好的策略来鼓励参与痴呆症相关研究。
    方法:我们的目标是更好地了解与,并参与,英国南亚人的饮食和痴呆症相关研究。这是使用公共和患者参与(PPI)方法实现的。以社区为基础,2023年6月在泰恩河畔纽卡斯尔举行了参与活动,涉及专家的信息共享和与南亚社区的圆桌讨论(n=26个贡献者),英国。与预先确定的PPI代表(n=3)的合作通报了PPI活动的内容和结构,以及招聘。使用模板分析合成数据,码本专题分析的一种形式。这涉及使用相关的先验主题演绎分析数据,被扩展了,或修改,通过归纳分析。
    结果:调查结果强调了信任的重要性,作为参与饮食和降低痴呆症风险研究的促进者的文化障碍的代表和欣赏。考虑语言障碍,时间限制,据报道,社会影响和如何嵌入社区外展活动是最大限度地参与的驱动因素。
    结论:这项PPI工作将根据医学研究委员会和国家健康与护理研究所制定复杂干预措施的指导,为设计和共同创造一种文化上适应大脑健康的饮食干预措施提供信息。
    BACKGROUND: Dementia is a global public health challenge. Evidence suggests that individuals from South Asian communities are an at-risk group for dementia, partly as a result of early and cumulative exposure to known dementia risk factors, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. There needs to be more culturally appropriate community engagement to increase awareness of dementia and identify better strategies to encourage participation in dementia-related research.
    METHODS: We aimed to better understand the barriers and facilitators towards engaging with, and participating in, diet and dementia related research among British South Asians. This was achieved using a public and patient involvement (PPI) approach. A community-based, engagement event involving information sharing from experts and roundtable discussions with South Asian communities (n = 26 contributors) was held in June 2023 in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK. Collaboration from preidentified PPI representatives (n = 3) informed the content and structure of PPI activities, as well as recruitment. Data were synthesised using template analysis, a form of codebook thematic analysis. This involved deductively analysing data using relevant a priori themes, which were expanded upon, or modified, via inductive analysis.
    RESULTS: The findings highlighted the importance of trust, representation and appreciation of cultural barriers as facilitators to engagement in diet and dementia risk reduction research. Consideration of language barriers, time constraints, social influences and how to embed community outreach activities were reported as driving factors to maximise participation.
    CONCLUSIONS: This PPI work will inform the design and co-creation of a culturally adapted dietary intervention for brain health in accordance with the Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health and Care Research guidance for developing complex interventions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    尽管人们越来越认识到青少年有权参与影响他们的决策,年轻人继续参与健康研究。其中一个原因是研究人员对当前关于青少年参与的好处的证据基础缺乏认识。为了解决这个问题,我们进行了一项综述,以综合青少年参与健康研究的积极影响的证据。该总括审查已在PROSPERO(CRD42021287467)预注册。我们搜索了11个数据库,谷歌学者,PROSPERO,引用列表,10期刊,472个组织的网站,并征求专家的意见。最终,我们收录了99篇评论文章。我们发现青少年参与对年轻人有许多积极的影响,包括增加的知识和技能;个人发展;经济利益;职业和学术成长;加强关系;并重视他们的经验。青少年参与研究本身的积极影响包括研究与青少年的相关性增加,改进招聘,开发更适合青少年的材料,加强数据收集和分析,更有效的传播。研究人员还通过增加知识从青少年的参与中受益,技能,以及他们态度的转变。支持青少年参与研究的积极影响的证据是大量的,但由于缺乏严格的评估,不一致的报告,评价方法不明确。
    Despite an increased recognition of the right of adolescents to be involved in decisions that affect them, young people continue to be under-involved in health research. One of the reasons is a lack of awareness among researchers on the current evidence base around the benefits of involving adolescents. To address this, we conducted an umbrella review to synthesize the evidence on the positive impacts of adolescent involvement in health research. This umbrella review was preregistered with PROSPERO (CRD42021287467). We searched 11 databases, Google Scholar, PROSPERO, reference lists, 10 journals, websites of 472 organizations, and sought input from experts. Ultimately, we included 99 review articles. We found that adolescent involvement has many positive impacts on young people, including increased knowledge and skills; personal development; financial benefits; career and academic growth; enhanced relationships; and valuing their experience. The positive impacts of adolescent involvement on the research itself include increased relevance of the study to adolescents, improved recruitment, development of more adolescent-friendly materials, enhanced data collection and analysis, and more effective dissemination. Researchers also benefited from adolescents\' involvement through increased knowledge, skills, and a shift in their attitudes. The evidence supporting the positive impacts of adolescent involvement in research is substantial but limited by a lack of rigorous evaluation, inconsistent reporting, and unclear evaluation methods.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号