Vandigo Joseph, Oloyede Ebenezer, Aly Abdalla, Laird Aurelia L, Cooke Catherine E, Mullins C Daniel
a Pharmaceutical Health Services Research Department , University of Maryland School of Pharmacy , Baltimore , MD , USA.
b Pharmerit International , Baltimore , MD , USA.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2016;16(2):193-8. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2016.1163222.
Researchers have produced evidence that identifies interventions that reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk; however, despite a significant investment in research CVD remains the leading cause of death. Engaging patients in the research process has the potential to ensure that evidence-based treatments are adopted in real-world practice to improve patient outcomes. The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute has created an Engagement Rubric to guide meaningful engagement in the research process. A 10-step systematic framework to enhance patient engagement throughout the comparative effectiveness research process also has been proposed. This special report identifies the relationship between these two approaches to patient engagement and describes examples of how patients could be engaged in a hypothetical CVD study.
研究人员已拿出证据,确定了可降低心血管疾病(CVD)风险的干预措施;然而,尽管在研究方面投入巨大,但CVD仍是主要死因。让患者参与研究过程有可能确保在实际医疗中采用循证治疗方法,以改善患者治疗效果。以患者为中心的结果研究所制定了一份参与度评分标准,以指导在研究过程中进行有意义的参与。还提出了一个10步系统框架,以在整个比较效果研究过程中提高患者参与度。本专题报告确定了这两种患者参与方式之间的关系,并描述了在一项假设的CVD研究中患者如何参与的示例。