Suppr超能文献

重要的不仅是你“做什么”,还有你“怎么做”:患者和公众参与健康研究的发展。

It's not just 'What' you do, it's also the 'Way' that you do it: Patient and Public Involvement in the Development of Health Research.

作者信息

Devonport Tracey J, Nicholls Wendy, Johnston Lynne H, Gutteridge Robin, Watt Angela

机构信息

Institute of Sport and Human Science, University of Wolverhampton, Gorway Road, Walsall, West Midlands, WS1 3BD, UK.

City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, Psychology Services 4th Floor, Chester Lodge, Kayll Road, Sunderland, SR4 7TP, UK.

出版信息

Int J Qual Health Care. 2018 Mar 1;30(2):152-156. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx177.

Abstract

PURPOSE

This article presents a reflective account of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in the development of obesity and binge eating research.

METHOD

We established Patient Advisory Groups (PAGs) at two English regional National Health Service (NHS) weight management services. PPI was evaluated as follows: (i) PAG members completed a Post Participation Evaluation Questionnaire, (ii) PAG meetings captured group discussion on PPI involvement, (iii) practitioner and researchers produced written reflections on PPI and (iv) sources one to three were consolidated during reflections that took place via e-mail and telephone correspondence between researchers and practitioners, culminating in a summary SKYPE meeting between one practitioner and one researcher involved in the PAGs.

RESULTS

Results in the form of reflections suggest guidelines on undertaking PPI were helpful with regard 'what to do', but less helpful on 'how'. For example, suggestions for the management of interpersonal factors such as eliciting self-disclosure and managing power differentials are insufficiently addressed in existing guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The present case study illustrated how interpersonal considerations can help or hinder the optimal use of PPI. Recommendations for practitioners and researchers planning PPI are offered.

摘要

目的

本文对患者及公众参与(PPI)肥胖与暴饮暴食研究的发展情况进行了反思性阐述。

方法

我们在英国两个地区的国民医疗服务体系(NHS)体重管理服务机构设立了患者咨询小组(PAGs)。对PPI的评估如下:(i)PAG成员完成一份参与后评估问卷,(ii)PAG会议记录了关于PPI参与情况的小组讨论,(iii)从业者和研究人员撰写了关于PPI的书面反思,(iv)在研究人员和从业者通过电子邮件和电话通信进行的反思过程中,整合了来源一至三的内容,最终在参与PAGs的一名从业者和一名研究人员之间举行了一次总结性的SKYPE会议。

结果

以反思形式呈现的结果表明,关于开展PPI的指南在“做什么”方面很有帮助,但在“如何做”方面帮助较小。例如,现有指南对人际因素管理的建议,如引发自我披露和管理权力差异等,阐述不足。

结论

本案例研究说明了人际因素如何有助于或阻碍PPI的最佳利用。为计划开展PPI的从业者和研究人员提供了建议。

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