Ellis Lauren E, Kass Nancy E
a Mathematica Policy Research.
b Berman Institute of Bioethics and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Jan-Mar;8(1):1-10. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2016.1206045. Epub 2016 Jun 28.
Despite growing interest in patient engagement in research, there are few empirical investigations of the nature of engagement and its effects. This information is important, not only to inform practical decisions researchers and funders must make, but also to inform discussion of the ethical implications of engaging patients, which has received little attention to date.
The aim of this study was to characterize patient engagement in research funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) as a step toward enhancing current understanding of the nature and effects of engagement and prompting an in-depth consideration of the ethical implications of engaging patients in research. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 19 PCORI-funded principal investigators and with 33 patients engaged in 18 of the same 19 projects.
Reasons cited for engaging patients included to enhance relevance and feasibility and to improve dissemination. While engagement occurred at different points during the research, patients were most commonly engaged in reviewing study materials and less commonly engaged at earlier points. Engagement varied by approach, frequency of interaction, and the extent to which patient input changed the research. Impacts of engagement included improving the relevance, feasibility, acceptability, and quality of the research.
Our findings on the nature and impacts of engagement have importance not only for practical questions researchers, funders, and patients might raise, but also for several ethical considerations regarding patient engagement related to why patients are engaged, the kinds of patients engaged, when patients are engaged, and how patients are engaged. We discuss our findings in consideration of the main ethical issues they imply, including ethical rationales for engagement, justice-related concerns, and ethical concerns arising from when and how patients are engaged. As efforts to engage patients increase, this discussion provides insights that researchers, funders, and patients may find valuable.
尽管患者参与研究越来越受到关注,但对于参与的性质及其影响的实证研究却很少。这些信息很重要,不仅有助于指导研究人员和资助者必须做出的实际决策,还能为有关患者参与的伦理影响的讨论提供参考,而这一讨论迄今为止很少受到关注。
本研究的目的是描述由患者为中心的结果研究机构(PCORI)资助的研究中患者的参与情况,以此作为加强当前对参与的性质和影响的理解,并促使深入考虑患者参与研究的伦理影响的一个步骤。对19位由PCORI资助的主要研究者以及参与了这19个项目中18个项目的33名患者进行了定性访谈。
提及让患者参与的原因包括提高相关性和可行性以及改善传播。虽然参与发生在研究的不同阶段,但患者最常参与审查研究材料,而在早期阶段参与较少。参与情况因方法、互动频率以及患者意见对研究的改变程度而异。参与的影响包括提高研究的相关性、可行性、可接受性和质量。
我们关于参与的性质和影响的研究结果不仅对研究人员、资助者和患者可能提出的实际问题很重要,而且对于与患者为何参与、参与的患者类型、患者何时参与以及患者如何参与相关的患者参与的若干伦理考量也很重要。我们结合研究结果所暗示的主要伦理问题进行讨论,包括参与的伦理依据、与公正相关的问题以及因患者何时参与和如何参与而产生的伦理问题。随着让患者参与的努力增加,这一讨论提供了研究人员、资助者和患者可能会觉得有价值的见解。