Daveson Barbara A, de Wolf-Linder Susanne, Witt Jana, Newson Kirstie, Morris Carolyn, Higginson Irene J, Evans Catherine J
Department of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation; Cicely Saunders Institute; King's College London, London, UK
Department of Palliative Care, Policy & Rehabilitation; Cicely Saunders Institute; King's College London, London, UK.
Palliat Med. 2015 Dec;29(10):939-49. doi: 10.1177/0269216315584875. Epub 2015 Apr 30.
Support and evidence for patient, unpaid caregiver and public involvement in research (user involvement) are growing. Consensus on how best to involve users in palliative care research is lacking.
To determine an optimal user-involvement model for palliative care research.
We hosted a consultation workshop using expert presentations, discussion and nominal group technique to generate recommendations and consensus on agreement of importance. A total of 35 users and 32 researchers were approached to attend the workshop, which included break-out groups and a ranking exercise. Descriptive statistical analysis to establish consensus and highlight divergence was applied. Qualitative analysis of discussions was completed to aid interpretation of findings.
SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants involved in palliative care research were invited to a global research institute, UK.
A total of 12 users and 5 researchers participated. Users wanted their involvement to be more visible, including during dissemination, with a greater emphasis on the difference their involvement makes. Researchers wanted to improve productivity, relevance and quality through involvement. Users and researchers agreed that an optimal model should consist of (a) early involvement to ensure meaningful involvement and impact and (b) diverse virtual and face-to-face involvement methods to ensure flexibility.
For involvement in palliative care research to succeed, early and flexible involvement is required. Researchers should advertise opportunities for involvement and promote impact of involvement via dissemination plans. Users should prioritise adding value to research through enhancing productivity, quality and relevance. More research is needed not only to inform implementation and ensure effectiveness but also to investigate the cost-effectiveness of involvement in palliative care research.
患者、无薪照护者及公众参与研究(用户参与)的支持与证据日益增多。目前缺乏关于如何最好地让用户参与姑息治疗研究的共识。
确定姑息治疗研究的最佳用户参与模式。
我们举办了一次咨询研讨会,通过专家报告、讨论和名义群体技术来就重要性达成一致意见并生成建议。共邀请了35名用户和32名研究人员参加该研讨会,其中包括分组讨论和排名活动。应用描述性统计分析来达成共识并突出分歧。对讨论进行了定性分析以辅助对结果的解释。
背景/参与者:参与姑息治疗研究的人员被邀请到英国的一家全球研究所。
共有12名用户和5名研究人员参与。用户希望他们的参与能更明显,包括在传播过程中,更加强调他们的参与所带来的影响。研究人员希望通过用户参与提高生产力、相关性和质量。用户和研究人员一致认为,最佳模式应包括:(a)早期参与以确保有意义的参与和影响;(b)采用多样化的虚拟和面对面参与方式以确保灵活性。
为使姑息治疗研究中的用户参与取得成功,需要早期且灵活的参与。研究人员应宣传参与机会,并通过传播计划促进参与的影响。用户应优先通过提高生产力、质量和相关性为研究增加价值。不仅需要更多研究来为实施提供信息并确保有效性,还需要研究姑息治疗研究中用户参与的成本效益。