• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review.探究患者及公众参与对健康和社会照护研究的影响:一项系统综述
Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x. Epub 2012 Jul 19.
2
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
3
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.心理健康问题的居家治疗:一项系统综述
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(15):1-139. doi: 10.3310/hta5150.
4
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.从临床试验参与者中获取不良反应数据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.
5
Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.性虐待和暴力的心理社会干预的幸存者、家庭和专业人员的经验:定性证据综合。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 4;10(10):CD013648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013648.pub2.
6
Welfare-to-work interventions and their effects on the mental and physical health of lone parents and their children.从福利到工作的干预措施及其对单亲父母及其子女身心健康的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 26;2(2):CD009820. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009820.pub3.
7
Welfare-to-work interventions and their effects on the mental and physical health of lone parents and their children.从福利到工作的干预措施及其对单亲父母及其子女身心健康的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Aug 20;8(8):CD009820. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009820.pub2.
8
The educational effects of portfolios on undergraduate student learning: a Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) systematic review. BEME Guide No. 11.档案袋对本科学生学习的教育效果:最佳证据医学教育(BEME)系统评价。BEME指南第11号。
Med Teach. 2009 Apr;31(4):282-98. doi: 10.1080/01421590902889897.
9
The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of enzyme replacement therapy for Gaucher's disease: a systematic review.戈谢病酶替代疗法的临床疗效和成本效益:一项系统评价。
Health Technol Assess. 2006 Jul;10(24):iii-iv, ix-136. doi: 10.3310/hta10240.
10
Participation in environmental enhancement and conservation activities for health and well-being in adults: a review of quantitative and qualitative evidence.成年人参与促进环境改善和保护活动对健康与福祉的影响:定量和定性证据综述
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 May 21;2016(5):CD010351. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010351.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluation Tools for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Health Research: A Scoping Review.健康研究中患者及公众参与(PPI)的评估工具:一项范围综述
Patient. 2025 Sep 5. doi: 10.1007/s40271-025-00765-3.
2
Design Mapping: A Conceptual Framework for Co-Designing Evidence-Based Digital Mental Health Programs.设计映射:共同设计循证数字心理健康项目的概念框架。
Health Expect. 2025 Oct;28(5):e70385. doi: 10.1111/hex.70385.
3
Optimizing Participant Engagement in Cyberhealth Co-Design: Course-of-Action Framework Analysis.优化网络健康协同设计中的参与者参与度:行动框架分析
JMIR Hum Factors. 2025 Aug 27;12:e70772. doi: 10.2196/70772.
4
Engagement Methods in Brain Tumor Genomic Research: Multimethod Comparative Study.脑肿瘤基因组研究中的参与方法:多方法比较研究
J Particip Med. 2025 Aug 21;17:e68852. doi: 10.2196/68852.
5
Research in Partnership With Older People-Involvement in Conducting and Analysing Focus Groups.与老年人合作开展研究——参与焦点小组的实施与分析
Health Expect. 2025 Aug;28(4):e70354. doi: 10.1111/hex.70354.
6
Citizen science approaches in the development of post-stroke physical activity interventions: A scoping review.中风后身体活动干预措施开发中的公民科学方法:一项范围综述。
PLoS One. 2025 Aug 20;20(8):e0329948. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0329948. eCollection 2025.
7
A review of acknowledgement and payment preferences of contributors on a register of patient public involvement in brain injury research.对脑损伤研究患者公众参与登记册上贡献者的致谢和支付偏好的综述。
Res Involv Engagem. 2025 Aug 19;11(1):99. doi: 10.1186/s40900-025-00772-6.
8
Talking placebo: a qualitative study of patients' attitudes toward open-label placebo implementation into clinical practice.谈论安慰剂:一项关于患者对在临床实践中实施开放标签安慰剂态度的定性研究。
Front Psychol. 2025 Jul 31;16:1533663. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1533663. eCollection 2025.
9
Increasing research capacity in adult social care: a research capacity-building partnership in Kent and its theory of change.提升成人社会护理领域的研究能力:肯特郡的一项研究能力建设伙伴关系及其变革理论。
NIHR Open Res. 2025 Jul 3;5:45. doi: 10.3310/nihropenres.13890.2. eCollection 2025.
10
Experience, Process, and Impact of Involving Informal Caregivers of People With Dementia as Public Contributors to Inform the Development of a Complex Intervention: A Mixed-Methods Study.让痴呆症患者的非正式照料者作为公众参与者参与复杂干预措施开发的经验、过程及影响:一项混合方法研究
Health Expect. 2025 Aug;28(4):e70382. doi: 10.1111/hex.70382.

本文引用的文献

1
The GRIPP checklist: strengthening the quality of patient and public involvement reporting in research.GRIPP 清单:提高患者和公众参与研究报告的质量。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011 Oct;27(4):391-9. doi: 10.1017/S0266462311000481.
2
Wise owls and professors: the role of older researchers in the review of the National Service Framework for Older People.睿智的猫头鹰与教授们:老年研究者在《老年人国家服务框架》审查中的作用。
Health Expect. 2008 Dec;11(4):409-17. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00513.x.
3
Engaging the public in priority-setting for health technology assessment: findings from a citizens' jury.让公众参与卫生技术评估的优先事项设定:公民陪审团的调查结果
Health Expect. 2008 Sep;11(3):282-93. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00501.x.
4
Citizens' juries in planning research priorities: process, engagement and outcome.规划研究重点中的公民陪审团:过程、参与度与结果
Health Expect. 2008 Sep;11(3):272-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00502.x.
5
The power and the promise: working with communities to analyze data, interpret findings, and get to outcomes.力量与承诺:与社区合作分析数据、解读结果并实现成果。
Am J Public Health. 2008 Aug;98(8):1407-17. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.113571. Epub 2008 Jun 12.
6
The impact of consumer involvement in research: an evaluation of consumer involvement in the London Primary Care Studies Programme.消费者参与研究的影响:对伦敦初级保健研究项目中消费者参与情况的评估。
Fam Pract. 2008 Jun;25(3):154-61. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn019. Epub 2008 May 30.
7
Assessment of the benefits of user involvement in health research from the Warwick Diabetes Care Research User Group: a qualitative case study.沃里克糖尿病护理研究用户组对用户参与健康研究益处的评估:一项定性案例研究。
Health Expect. 2007 Sep;10(3):268-77. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00451.x.
8
User involvement in the development of a research bid: barriers, enablers and impacts.用户参与研究申请的制定:障碍、促进因素及影响
Health Expect. 2007 Jun;10(2):173-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00436.x.
9
Benefits of and barriers to involving users in medical device technology development and evaluation.让用户参与医疗设备技术开发和评估的益处与障碍。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007 Winter;23(1):131-7. doi: 10.1017/S0266462307051677.
10
Service user involvement in nursing, midwifery and health visiting research: a review of evidence and practice.服务使用者参与护理、助产和健康访视研究:证据与实践综述。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2008 Feb;45(2):298-315. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.09.010. Epub 2006 Dec 11.

探究患者及公众参与对健康和社会照护研究的影响:一项系统综述

Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review.

作者信息

Brett Jo, Staniszewska Sophie, Mockford Carole, Herron-Marx Sandra, Hughes John, Tysall Colin, Suleman Rashida

机构信息

Royal College of Nursing Research Institute, School of Health and Social Studies, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x. Epub 2012 Jul 19.

DOI:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x
PMID:22809132
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5060910/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing international interest in patient and public involvement (PPI) in research, yet relatively little robust evidence exists about its impact on health and social care research.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research.

DESIGN

A systematic search of electronic databases and health libraries was undertaken from 1995 to 2009. Data were extracted and quality assessed utilizing the guidelines of the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination 2009 and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). Grey literature was assessed using the Dixon-Woods et al. (2005) checklist.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

All study types that reported the impact PPI had on the health and/or social care research study.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 66 studies reporting the impact of PPI on health and social care research were included. The positive impacts identified enhanced the quality and appropriateness of research. Impacts were reported for all stages of research, including the development of user-focused research objectives, development of user-relevant research questions, development of user-friendly information, questionnaires and interview schedules, more appropriate recruitment strategies for studies, consumer-focused interpretation of data and enhanced implementation and dissemination of study results. Some challenging impacts were also identified.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first international evidence of PPI impact that has emerged at all key stages of the research process. However, much of the evidence base concerning impact remains weak and needs significant enhancement in the next decade.

摘要

背景

国际上对患者及公众参与研究(PPI)的兴趣日益浓厚,但关于其对健康和社会护理研究影响的有力证据相对较少。

目的

确定患者及公众参与对健康和社会护理研究的影响。

设计

对1995年至2009年的电子数据库和健康图书馆进行了系统检索。利用英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)评审与传播中心2009年的指南以及批判性评估技能计划(CASP)提取数据并进行质量评估。使用迪克森 - 伍兹等人(2005年)的清单对灰色文献进行评估。

纳入标准

所有报告患者及公众参与对健康和/或社会护理研究影响的研究类型。

主要结果

共纳入66项报告患者及公众参与对健康和社会护理研究影响的研究。确定的积极影响提高了研究的质量和适宜性。研究各阶段均有影响报告,包括制定以用户为中心的研究目标、提出与用户相关的研究问题、开发用户友好型信息、问卷和访谈提纲、制定更合适的研究招募策略、以消费者为重点的数据解读以及加强研究结果的实施和传播。还确定了一些具有挑战性的影响。

结论

本研究提供了患者及公众参与在研究过程所有关键阶段产生影响的首个国际证据。然而,关于影响的许多证据基础仍然薄弱,在未来十年需要大幅加强。