Suppr超能文献

参与对研究人员的影响:一次学习经历。

The impact of involvement on researchers: a learning experience.

作者信息

Staley Kristina, Abbey-Vital Isabelle, Nolan Claire

机构信息

TwoCan Associates, Montague House, 4 St. Mary's Street, Ross on Wye, HR9 5HT UK.

Parkinson's UK, 215 Vauxhall Bridge Road, London, SW1V 1EJ UK.

出版信息

Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Sep 18;3:20. doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0071-1. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

The impacts of involvement in research are often described in terms of the difference made to the research, the people involved and less frequently the researchers. This paper focuses on the researchers' experiences of involvement, based on an evaluation of a pilot project supporting patient/carer involvement in research at Parkinson's UK. Telephone interviews were conducted with researchers from eight different research projects with involvement. The researchers reported gaining new knowledge from patients and carers. They used this knowledge to change their project designs, interventions and new devices. They also gained new skills in communicating with the public. Meeting patients for the first time had a profound impact on some researchers, causing a change in their professional values. Face-to-face contact seemed particularly important to gain a sense of the 'people behind the data', which suggests such meetings may result in impacts beyond those typically achieved through an exchange of documents. Involvement also influenced one researcher's choices and preferences, in terms of who to ask to take part in their study In summary, researchers often learn something new from talking to patients and carers. Facilitating this conversation seems important to maximise the impact of this learning. In future, it might be helpful for evaluations of involvement to ask researchers in more detail about what they learnt from patients/carers and how they applied their new skills and knowledge. This may help to understand how involvement can influence researchers' thinking to have an impact on research.

ABSTRACT

The impacts of patient/public involvement are often described in terms of the difference made to the research, the researchers and the people involved. Involvement often impacts on by influencing the design, delivery and dissemination. Patients/the public report gaining new skills and knowledge, increased self-confidence, and satisfaction from making a difference. There are fewer reports of the impacts on . This paper discusses the findings from an evaluation of a pilot project supporting patient/carer involvement in research at Parkinson's UK, focusing on the researchers' experiences. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with one researcher from each of the eight research projects which involved patients/carers in the pilot. The findings were analysed using theoretical thematic analysis. Learning can be described as acquiring new knowledge, behaviours, skills, values, or preferences. The researchers' reports reflected these different types of learning. They reported gaining new knowledge from patients and carers, which they recognised as distinct from their textbook knowledge of the condition. They used this learning to change their project designs and their new interventions and devices. They also gained new skills in communicating with patients and carers about the aims and significance of their research. Meeting patients for the first time had a profound impact on some researchers causing them to change their professional values. Face-to-face contact seemed particularly important to gain a sense of the 'people behind the data', which suggests such meetings may result in impacts beyond those typically achieved through an exchange of documents. The involvement also influenced one researchers' priorities and preferences, in terms of what questions to ask and of whom, in their project. Researchers learn from an exchange of knowledge with patients/ carers, which influences their plans and actions. This seems to be one way that involvement subsequently has an impact on research. Facilitating this exchange seems important to support mutual learning and to enhance the impact on researchers. Future evaluations of involvement might benefit from exploring what researchers learnt from patients/carers and how they applied their new skills and knowledge.

摘要

通俗易懂的总结

参与研究的影响通常从对研究、相关人员以及较少提及的研究人员所产生的差异方面来描述。本文基于对英国帕金森病协会支持患者/护理人员参与研究的一个试点项目的评估,聚焦于研究人员的参与体验。对来自八个不同参与研究项目的研究人员进行了电话访谈。研究人员报告称从患者和护理人员那里获得了新知识。他们利用这些知识来改变项目设计、干预措施和新设备。他们还在与公众沟通方面获得了新技能。首次与患者会面给一些研究人员带来了深刻影响,导致他们的职业价值观发生了变化。面对面接触对于了解“数据背后的人”似乎尤为重要,这表明此类会面可能产生的影响超出了通常通过文件交流所能达到的程度。参与还在选择让谁参与其研究方面影响了一位研究人员的选择和偏好。总之,研究人员经常从与患者和护理人员的交谈中学到新东西。促进这种交流对于最大化这种学习的影响似乎很重要。未来,对参与情况的评估或许更详细地询问研究人员从患者/护理人员那里学到了什么以及他们如何运用新技能和知识会有所帮助。这可能有助于理解参与如何能影响研究人员的思维从而对研究产生影响。

摘要

患者/公众参与的影响通常从对研究、研究人员和相关人员所产生的差异方面来描述。参与往往通过影响设计、实施和传播来产生影响。患者/公众报告称获得了新技能和知识、增强了自信以及因做出贡献而感到满足。关于对研究人员的影响的报告较少。本文讨论了对英国帕金森病协会支持患者/护理人员参与研究的一个试点项目的评估结果,重点关注研究人员的体验。对八个涉及患者/护理人员参与试点的研究项目中的每个项目的一名研究人员进行了半结构化电话访谈。使用理论主题分析法对研究结果进行了分析。学习可以被描述为获取新知识、行为、技能、价值观或偏好。研究人员的报告反映了这些不同类型的学习。他们报告称从患者和护理人员那里获得了新知识,他们认识到这与他们关于该病症的书本知识不同。他们利用这种学习来改变项目设计以及新的干预措施和设备。他们还在与患者和护理人员就其研究的目的和意义进行沟通方面获得了新技能。首次与患者会面给一些研究人员带来了深刻影响,使他们改变了职业价值观。面对面接触对于了解“数据背后的人”似乎尤为重要,这表明此类会面可能产生的影响超出了通常通过文件交流所能达到的程度。参与还在项目中询问什么问题以及询问谁方面影响了一位研究人员的优先事项和偏好。研究人员通过与患者/护理人员的知识交流来学习,这会影响他们的计划和行动。这似乎是参与随后对研究产生影响的一种方式。促进这种交流对于支持相互学习以及增强对研究人员的影响似乎很重要。未来对参与情况的评估或许通过探索研究人员从患者/护理人员那里学到了什么以及他们如何运用新技能和知识而受益。

相似文献

1
The impact of involvement on researchers: a learning experience.
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Sep 18;3:20. doi: 10.1186/s40900-017-0071-1. eCollection 2017.
3
'Is it worth doing?' Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement in research.
Res Involv Engagem. 2015 Jul 31;1:6. doi: 10.1186/s40900-015-0008-5. eCollection 2015.
5
Who should I involve in my research and why? Patients, carers or the public?
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Jun 14;7(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00282-1.
7
Missed opportunities for impact in patient and carer involvement: a mixed methods case study of research priority setting.
Res Involv Engagem. 2015 Aug 4;1:7. doi: 10.1186/s40900-015-0007-6. eCollection 2015.
10
Patient and public involvement in doctoral research: reflections and experiences of the PPI contributors and researcher.
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 May 11;6:23. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00201-w. eCollection 2020.

引用本文的文献

2
Stakeholders' perspectives on communicating biosecurity to encourage behavior change in farmers.
Front Vet Sci. 2025 Mar 19;12:1562648. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1562648. eCollection 2025.
5
The Views of Healthcare Professionals on iFall, a Smartphone Application for Falls Reporting in Parkinson's Disease: A Qualitative Study.
J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2025 Feb 1;38(5):8919887251317728. doi: 10.1177/08919887251317728.
7
Confidence, attitude, and practice of scientific research among health professions' students in the United Arab Emirates.
PLoS One. 2024 May 31;19(5):e0304357. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304357. eCollection 2024.
10
What motivates public collaborators to become and stay involved in health research?
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Feb 12;10(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00555-5.

本文引用的文献

1
It's not evidence, it's insight: bringing patients' perspectives into health technology appraisal at NICE.
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Mar 24;2:4. doi: 10.1186/s40900-016-0018-y. eCollection 2016.
2
Patients', clinicians' and the research communities' priorities for treatment research: there is an important mismatch.
Res Involv Engagem. 2015 Jun 25;1:2. doi: 10.1186/s40900-015-0003-x. eCollection 2015.
3
Impact on the individual: what do patients and carers gain, lose and expect from being involved in research?
J Ment Health. 2016;25(1):28-35. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2015.1101424. Epub 2016 Jan 6.
4
Patient engagement in research: a systematic review.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-89.
5
What has been the effect on trial outcome assessments of a decade of patient participation in OMERACT?
J Rheumatol. 2014 Jan;41(1):177-84. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.130816. Epub 2013 Oct 15.
6
Patient and public involvement in health research: ethical imperative and/or radical challenge?
J Health Psychol. 2014 Jan;19(1):149-58. doi: 10.1177/1359105313500249. Epub 2013 Sep 20.
7
Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework.
Health Expect. 2015 Oct;18(5):1151-66. doi: 10.1111/hex.12090. Epub 2013 Jun 3.
8
Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review.
Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x. Epub 2012 Jul 19.
9
A model for developing outcome measures from the perspectives of mental health service users.
Int Rev Psychiatry. 2011;23(1):41-6. doi: 10.3109/09540261.2010.545990.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验