• 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

一份关于糖尿病和高血压管理的患者与医疗服务提供者研究议程。

A Patient and Provider Research Agenda on Diabetes and Hypertension Management.

作者信息

Zimmerman Emily B, Cook Sarah K, Haley Amber D, Woolf Steven H, Price Sarah K

机构信息

Center on Society and Health, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.

Center on Society and Health, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.

出版信息

Am J Prev Med. 2017 Jul;53(1):123-129. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.034. Epub 2017 Mar 15.

DOI:10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.034
PMID:28314558
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6979736/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

A demonstration project in Richmond, Virginia involved patients and other stakeholders in the creation of a research agenda on dietary and behavioral management of diabetes and hypertension. Given the impact of these diseases on morbidity and mortality, considerable research has been directed at the challenges patients face in chronic disease management. The continuing need to understand disparities and find evidence-based interventions to improve outcomes has been fruitful, but disparities and unmet needs persist.

METHODS

The Stakeholder Engagement in Question Development (SEED) method is a stakeholder engagement methodology that combines engagement with a review of available evidence to generate research questions that address current research gaps and are important to patients and other stakeholders. Using the SEED method, patients and other stakeholders participated in research question development through a combination of collaborative, participatory, and consultative engagement. Steps in the process included: (1) identifying the topic and recruiting participants; (2) conducting focus groups and interviews; (3) developing conceptual models; (4) developing research questions; and (5) prioritizing research questions.

RESULTS

Stakeholders were involved in the SEED process from February to August 2015. Eighteen questions were prioritized for inclusion in the research agenda, covering diverse domains, from healthcare provision to social and environmental factors. Data analysis took place September to May 2016. During this time, researchers conducted a literature review to target research gaps.

CONCLUSIONS

The stakeholder-prioritized, novel research questions developed through the SEED process can directly inform future research and guide the development of evidence that translates more directly to clinical practice.

摘要

引言

弗吉尼亚州里士满的一个示范项目让患者及其他利益相关者参与制定了一项关于糖尿病和高血压饮食与行为管理的研究议程。鉴于这些疾病对发病率和死亡率的影响,针对患者在慢性病管理中面临的挑战已经开展了大量研究。持续需要了解差异并找到基于证据的干预措施以改善结果,这已取得丰硕成果,但差异和未满足的需求依然存在。

方法

利益相关者参与问题开发(SEED)方法是一种利益相关者参与方法,它将参与与对现有证据的审查相结合,以生成解决当前研究空白且对患者和其他利益相关者很重要的研究问题。使用SEED方法,患者和其他利益相关者通过协作、参与和协商参与相结合的方式参与研究问题开发。该过程的步骤包括:(1)确定主题并招募参与者;(2)开展焦点小组讨论和访谈;(3)开发概念模型;(4)提出研究问题;(5)对研究问题进行排序。

结果

利益相关者在2015年2月至8月期间参与了SEED过程。有18个问题被优先纳入研究议程,涵盖从医疗服务提供到社会和环境因素等不同领域。数据分析在2016年9月至5月进行。在此期间,研究人员进行了文献综述以找出研究空白。

结论

通过SEED过程制定的由利益相关者优先确定的新颖研究问题可直接为未来研究提供信息,并指导更直接转化为临床实践的证据的开发。

相似文献

1
A Patient and Provider Research Agenda on Diabetes and Hypertension Management.一份关于糖尿病和高血压管理的患者与医疗服务提供者研究议程。
Am J Prev Med. 2017 Jul;53(1):123-129. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.034. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
2
A lung cancer research agenda that reflects the diverse perspectives of community stakeholders: process and outcomes of the SEED method.一项反映社区利益相关者不同观点的肺癌研究议程:SEED方法的过程与成果
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Jan 11;5:3. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0134-y. eCollection 2019.
3
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.
4
Setting a research agenda for vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome using a patient and stakeholder engagement model.制定血管型埃勒斯-当洛斯综合征研究议程,采用患者和利益相关者参与模式。
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Oct;72(4):1436-1444.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.12.043. Epub 2020 Feb 27.
5
Patient-Oriented Research Competencies in Health (PORCH) for patients, healthcare providers, decision-makers and researchers: protocol of a scoping review.面向患者、医疗保健提供者、决策者和研究人员的健康患者导向研究能力(PORCH):系统评价方案。
Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 19;7(1):101. doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0762-1.
6
Patient participation as dialogue: setting research agendas.患者参与作为对话:设定研究议程。
Health Expect. 2010 Jun;13(2):160-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00549.x.
7
Prioritizing research needs based on a systematic evidence review: a pilot process for engaging stakeholders.基于系统证据审查的优先研究需求:一个让利益相关者参与的试点过程。
Health Expect. 2013 Dec;16(4):338-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00716.x. Epub 2011 Aug 12.
8
A Patient-Prioritized Research Agenda for Clinical Trials in Kidney Stone Disease.
J Urol. 2025 Jan;213(1):80-89. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000004242. Epub 2024 Sep 20.
9
Future Research Prioritization: Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy in Older Patients.未来研究重点:老年患者的植入式心脏复律除颤器治疗
J Gen Intern Med. 2015 Dec;30(12):1812-20. doi: 10.1007/s11606-015-3411-6.
10
Developing a Patient- and Family-Centered Research Agenda for Hospital Medicine: The Improving Hospital Outcomes through Patient Engagement (i-HOPE) Study.制定以患者和家庭为中心的医院医学研究议程:通过患者参与提高医院效果(i-HOPE)研究。
J Hosp Med. 2020 Jun;15(6):331-337. doi: 10.12788/jhm.3386.

引用本文的文献

1
Impacting Community Well-Being Through Effective Engagement Using the SEED Method.
J Ext. 2024;62(4). doi: 10.34068/joe.62.04.14. Epub 2024 Nov 16.
2
Evaluation of a Participatory Action Project to Address Opioid Misuse: Breaking Down Barriers Through Partnership Processes.一项应对阿片类药物滥用的参与式行动项目评估:通过伙伴关系流程消除障碍
Gateways. 2024;17(1). doi: 10.5130/ijcre.v17i1.9202. Epub 2024 Dec 19.
3
Multidisciplinary stakeholder engagement in a type 2 diabetes comparative effectiveness study utilizing real-world data.多学科利益相关者参与一项利用真实世界数据的2型糖尿病比较疗效研究。
J Clin Transl Sci. 2024 Nov 29;8(1):e220. doi: 10.1017/cts.2024.666. eCollection 2024.
4
Addressing opioid misuse through community-engaged strategy development: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.通过社区参与策略制定来解决阿片类药物滥用问题:一项随机对照试验的研究方案
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Jul 19;10(1):74. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00612-z.
5
Bringing Lived Experience to Research on Health and Homelessness: Perspectives of Researchers and Lived Experience Partners.将生活经验带入健康和无家可归问题研究中:研究人员和生活经验伙伴的观点。
Community Ment Health J. 2023 Oct;59(7):1235-1242. doi: 10.1007/s10597-023-01138-6. Epub 2023 May 19.
6
Setting Patient-Centered Priorities for Cardiovascular Disease in Central Appalachia: Engaging Stakeholder Experts to Develop a Research Agenda.以患者为中心设定美国中阿巴拉契亚地区心血管疾病重点:让利益攸关方专家参与制定研究议程。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Apr 27;20(9):5660. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20095660.
7
Diabetes-related research priorities of people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in Germany.1 型和 2 型糖尿病患者的糖尿病相关研究重点:德国的一项横断面研究。
Sci Rep. 2022 Dec 2;12(1):20835. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-24180-y.
8
A Guide to Selecting Participatory Research Methods Based on Project and Partnership Goals.基于项目和伙伴关系目标选择参与式研究方法指南。
J Particip Res Methods. 2022;3(1). doi: 10.35844/001c.32605. Epub 2022 May 23.
9
Assessing the Impacts and Ripple Effects of a Community-University Partnership: A Retrospective Roadmap.评估社区与大学合作关系的影响及连锁反应:一份回顾性路线图
Mich J Community Serv Learn. 2019 Winter;25(1):62-76. doi: 10.3998/mjcsloa.3239521.0025.106.
10
Participatory Action Planning to Address the Opioid Crisis in a Rural Virginia Community Using the SEED Method.采用种子方法在弗吉尼亚州农村社区开展参与式行动计划以应对阿片类药物危机
J Particip Res Methods. 2020;1(1). Epub 2020 Jul 21.

本文引用的文献

1
Deaths: Final Data for 2013.死亡情况:2013年最终数据。
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2016 Feb 16;64(2):1-119.
2
Methods for engaging stakeholders in comparative effectiveness research: a patient-centered approach to improving diabetes care.参与比较效益研究的利益相关者的方法:一种以患者为中心的改善糖尿病护理的方法。
Healthc (Amst). 2015 Jun;3(2):80-8. doi: 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2015.02.005. Epub 2015 Mar 13.
3
Reducing the burden of suicide in the U.S.: the aspirational research goals of the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention Research Prioritization Task Force.减轻美国的自杀负担:自杀预防研究优先排序特别工作组国家行动联盟的理想研究目标。
Am J Prev Med. 2014 Sep;47(3):309-14. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.01.004. Epub 2014 Apr 18.
4
Hypertension among adults in the United States: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2011-2012.美国成年人高血压情况:2011 - 2012年国家健康与营养检查调查
NCHS Data Brief. 2013 Oct(133):1-8.
5
Effective stakeholder participation in setting research priorities using a Global Evidence Mapping approach.采用全球证据绘图方法有效让利益相关者参与设定研究重点。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 May;66(5):496-502.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.04.002. Epub 2012 Jul 18.
6
Conceptual approaches to the study of health disparities.健康差异研究的概念方法。
Annu Rev Public Health. 2012 Apr;33:41-58. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124534. Epub 2012 Jan 3.
7
How best to engage patients, doctors, and other stakeholders in designing comparative effectiveness studies.如何最好地让患者、医生和其他利益相关者参与设计比较效果研究。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 Oct;29(10):1834-41. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0675.
8
Identifying and prioritizing uncertainties: patient and clinician engagement in the identification of research questions.确定和优先处理不确定性:患者和临床医生参与确定研究问题。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2010 Jun;16(3):627-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2009.01262.x. Epub 2010 May 5.
9
Consensus research priorities for cerebral palsy: a Delphi survey of consumers, researchers, and clinicians.脑性瘫痪共识研究重点:消费者、研究人员和临床医生的德尔菲调查。
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010 Mar;52(3):270-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03358.x. Epub 2009 Aug 20.
10
Do different stakeholder groups share mental health research priorities? A four-arm Delphi study.不同利益相关者群体是否共享心理健康研究重点?一项四臂德尔菲研究。
Health Expect. 2008 Dec;11(4):418-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00492.x.