Harkness/Bosch Fellow, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USAResearch Associate, Department Non-Drug Interventions, Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Cologne, GermanyAssociate Professor, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USAProfessor, Departments of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics and Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, CanadaProfessor, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Health Expect. 2013 Dec;16(4):323-37. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00722.x. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
The Institute of Medicine recently recommended that comparative effectiveness research (CER) should involve input from consumers. While systematic reviews are a major component of CER, little is known about consumer involvement.
To explore current approaches to involving consumers in US-based and key international organizations and groups conducting or commissioning systematic reviews ('organizations').
In-depth, semi-structured interviews with key informants and review of organizations' websites.
Seventeen highly regarded US-based and international (Cochrane Collaboration, Campbell Collaboration) organizations.
Organizations that usually involve consumers (seven of 17 in our sample) involve them at a programmatic level in the organization or in individual reviews through one-time consultation or on-going collaboration. For example, consumers may suggest topics, provide input on the key questions of the review, provide comments on draft protocols and reports, serve as co-authors or on an advisory group. Organizations involve different types of consumers (individual patients, consumer advocates, families and caregivers), recruiting them mainly through patient organizations and consumer networks. Some offer training in research methods, and one developed training for researchers on how to involve consumers. Little formal evaluation of the effects of consumer involvement is being carried out.
Consumers are currently involved in systematic reviews in a variety of ways and for various reasons. Assessing which approaches are most effective in achieving different aims of consumer involvement is now required to inform future recommendations on consumer involvement in CER.
美国医学研究所最近建议,比较效果研究(CER)应该让消费者参与其中。虽然系统评价是 CER 的一个主要组成部分,但对于消费者的参与方式知之甚少。
探索美国和关键国际组织和团体在进行或委托进行系统评价时(“组织”)让消费者参与的当前方法。
对关键信息提供者进行深入的半结构化访谈,并审查组织的网站。
17 家备受推崇的美国和国际组织(Cochrane 协作组织、坎贝尔协作组织)。
通常涉及消费者的组织(我们样本中的 7 个)在组织层面或通过一次性咨询或持续合作,在计划层面或个别审查中让消费者参与。例如,消费者可以提出主题,对审查的关键问题提供意见,对协议草案和报告提出意见,担任共同作者或顾问小组。组织涉及不同类型的消费者(个体患者、消费者权益倡导者、家庭和照顾者),主要通过患者组织和消费者网络招募他们。一些组织提供研究方法培训,还有一个组织为研究人员提供了关于如何让消费者参与的培训。目前几乎没有对消费者参与的效果进行正式评估。
消费者目前以各种方式和出于各种原因参与系统评价。现在需要评估哪些方法在实现消费者参与 CER 的不同目标方面最有效,以便为未来的消费者参与 CER 建议提供信息。