Suppr超能文献

患者和临床医生的研究重点。

Patients' and clinicians' research priorities.

机构信息

ESRC Research Fellow, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2011 Dec;14(4):439-48. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00648.x. Epub 2010 Dec 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

If research addresses the questions of relevance to patients and clinicians, decision-makers will be better equipped to design and deliver health services which meet their needs. To this end, a number of initiatives have engaged patients and clinicians in setting research agendas. This paper aimed to scope the research literature addressing such efforts.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy combined electronic searches of bibliographic databases with handsearching and contacting key authors. Two researchers, initially working independently, described the relevant reports.

FINDINGS

Over 250 studies addressed patients' or clinicians' priorities for research and outcomes for assessment. This literature described different routes for patients and clinicians to contribute to research agendas. Two-thirds of the studies addressing patients' or clinicians' research questions were applicable across health care, with the remainder focussed on specific health conditions. The 27 formal studies of patient involvement revealed a literature that has grown in the last decade. Although only nine studies engaged patients and clinicians in identifying research questions together, they show that methods have advanced over time, with all of them engaging participants directly and repeatedly in facilitated debate and most employing formal decision-making procedures.

CONCLUSION

A sizeable literature is available to inform priorities for research and the methods for setting research agendas with patients and clinicians. We recommend that research funders and researchers draw on this literature to provide relevant research for health service decision-makers.

摘要

背景

如果研究能够解决患者和临床医生关注的问题,决策者将能够更好地设计和提供满足他们需求的卫生服务。为此,许多举措已经让患者和临床医生参与制定研究议程。本文旨在概述解决此类问题的研究文献。

方法

采用系统搜索策略,结合电子检索书目数据库、手工检索和联系关键作者。两名研究人员最初独立描述了相关报告。

结果

有超过 250 项研究探讨了患者或临床医生对研究的优先事项和评估结果。该文献描述了患者和临床医生为研究议程做出贡献的不同途径。三分之二的研究针对患者或临床医生的研究问题适用于整个医疗保健领域,其余研究则侧重于特定的健康状况。27 项关于患者参与的正规研究揭示了过去十年中这一文献的增长。尽管只有九项研究让患者和临床医生共同确定研究问题,但它们表明方法随着时间的推移而不断发展,所有这些方法都直接和反复地让参与者参与到有组织的辩论中,并且大多数都采用了正式的决策程序。

结论

有大量文献可以为患者和临床医生确定研究重点和制定研究议程的方法提供信息。我们建议研究资助者和研究人员借鉴这些文献,为卫生服务决策者提供相关研究。

相似文献

1
Patients' and clinicians' research priorities.患者和临床医生的研究重点。
Health Expect. 2011 Dec;14(4):439-48. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00648.x. Epub 2010 Dec 22.
2
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.

引用本文的文献

4
Priorities in Pulmonary Rehabilitation Research: The Patient Perspective.肺康复研究的重点:患者视角
Physiother Can. 2022 May 9;74(3):257-264. doi: 10.3138/ptc-2020-0081. eCollection 2022 Aug.

本文引用的文献

2
Health researchers' attitudes towards public involvement in health research.健康研究人员对公众参与健康研究的态度。
Health Expect. 2009 Jun;12(2):209-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00532.x. Epub 2009 Apr 22.
5
Beyond scientific rigour: funding cancer research of public value.超越科学严谨性:资助具有公共价值的癌症研究。
Health Policy. 2007 Dec;84(2-3):234-42. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.05.002. Epub 2007 Jun 15.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验