Caron-Flinterman J Francisca, Broerse Jacqueline E W, Teerling Julia, Bunders Joske F G
Athena Institute for Research on Communication and Innovation in Health and Life Sciences, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Health Expect. 2005 Sep;8(3):253-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2005.00337.x.
Although patients are increasingly involved in agenda setting within specific fields of health research, they rarely participate in decision-making on the entire breadth of health research, including biomedical research. This might be attributable to a widely held view that patients are incapable of adequate research prioritization due to a lack of relevant knowledge, a failure to look beyond their own individual problems or an inability to objectively consider long-term targets.
By conducting transparent and structured consultations with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients regarding their health research priorities, we aim to assess the ability of patients to prioritize research in a well-argued way.
Patients were consulted through seven focus groups, a feedback meeting, and a questionnaire. The focus groups and the feedback meeting aimed to explore the entire breadth of patients' problems experienced in relation to their diseases, while the questionnaire aimed to investigate patients' prioritization of possible research targets focused on solving these problems.
The focus groups produced a wide range of problems, including those related to health-care organization, social environment, therapy and costs. In terms of research prioritization, patients focused primarily on biomedical issues, particularly aetiology, co-morbidity and effective medication.
The consultation procedure successfully elicited patients' research priorities including the underlying arguments. Our results indicate that asthma and COPD patients are capable of research prioritization in a well-argued way and that they highly value biomedical research. Furthermore, as they prioritized some research topics that are not covered by current Dutch research programmes, we argue that patient participation can broaden research agenda setting.
尽管患者越来越多地参与到特定健康研究领域的议程设定中,但他们很少参与包括生物医学研究在内的整个健康研究领域的决策。这可能归因于一种普遍观点,即患者由于缺乏相关知识、无法超越自身个体问题或无法客观考虑长期目标,因而没有能力对研究进行充分的优先级排序。
通过与哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者就其健康研究优先级进行透明且结构化的咨询,我们旨在评估患者以充分论证的方式对研究进行优先级排序的能力。
通过七个焦点小组、一次反馈会议和一份问卷对患者进行咨询。焦点小组和反馈会议旨在探讨患者在疾病方面所经历问题的全貌,而问卷旨在调查患者对旨在解决这些问题的可能研究目标的优先级排序。
焦点小组提出了广泛的问题,包括与医疗保健组织、社会环境、治疗和费用相关的问题。在研究优先级排序方面,患者主要关注生物医学问题,尤其是病因、合并症和有效药物。
咨询程序成功引出了患者的研究优先级,包括潜在的论据。我们的结果表明,哮喘和COPD患者有能力以充分论证的方式对研究进行优先级排序,并且他们高度重视生物医学研究。此外,由于他们将一些当前荷兰研究项目未涵盖的研究主题列为优先事项,我们认为患者参与可以拓宽研究议程的设定。