Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Sciences, York St. John University, York, UK.
School of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Triumph Road, Nottingham, NG7 2TU, UK.
BMC Psychiatry. 2018 Jun 28;18(1):213. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1794-8.
Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in mental health research is increasing, especially in early (pre-funding) stages. PPI is less consistent in later stages, including in analysing qualitative data. The aims of this study were to develop a methodology for involving PPI co-researchers in collaboratively analysing qualitative mental health research data with academic researchers, to pilot and refine this methodology, and to create a best practice framework for collaborative data analysis (CDA) of qualitative mental health research.
In the context of the RECOLLECT Study of Recovery Colleges, a critical literature review of collaborative data analysis studies was conducted, to identify approaches and recommendations for successful CDA. A CDA methodology was developed and then piloted in RECOLLECT, followed by refinement and development of a best practice framework.
From 10 included publications, four CDA approaches were identified: (1) consultation, (2) development, (3) application and (4) development and application of coding framework. Four characteristics of successful CDA were found: CDA process is co-produced; CDA process is realistic regarding time and resources; demands of the CDA process are manageable for PPI co-researchers; and group expectations and dynamics are effectively managed. A four-meeting CDA process was piloted to co-produce a coding framework based on qualitative data collected in RECOLLECT and to create a mental health service user-defined change model relevant to Recovery Colleges. Formal and informal feedback demonstrated active involvement. The CDA process involved an extra 80 person-days of time (40 from PPI co-researchers, 40 from academic researchers). The process was refined into a best practice framework comprising Preparation, CDA and Application phases.
This study has developed a typology of approaches to collaborative analysis of qualitative data in mental health research, identified from available evidence the characteristics of successful involvement, and developed, piloted and refined the first best practice framework for collaborative analysis of qualitative data. This framework has the potential to support meaningful PPI in data analysis in the context of qualitative mental health research studies, a previously neglected yet central part of the research cycle.
患者和公众参与(PPI)在精神健康研究中越来越多,特别是在早期(资金申请前)阶段。PPI 在后期阶段(包括分析定性数据)的一致性较低。本研究的目的是开发一种方法,使 PPI 共同研究人员能够与学术研究人员合作分析定性精神健康研究数据,试点和完善该方法,并为定性精神健康研究的合作数据分析(CDA)创建最佳实践框架。
在 RECOLLECT 康复学院研究的背景下,对合作数据分析研究进行了批判性文献综述,以确定成功的 CDA 方法和建议。开发了一种 CDA 方法,并在 RECOLLECT 中进行了试点,然后进行了改进和最佳实践框架的开发。
从 10 篇纳入的文献中,确定了四种 CDA 方法:(1)咨询,(2)开发,(3)应用和(4)编码框架的开发和应用。发现了成功的 CDA 的四个特征:CDA 过程是共同产生的;CDA 过程在时间和资源方面是现实的;CDA 过程的要求对 PPI 共同研究人员来说是可管理的;并且有效地管理了小组的期望和动态。进行了四次会议的 CDA 试点,以共同生成基于在 RECOLLECT 中收集的定性数据的编码框架,并创建与康复学院相关的心理健康服务用户定义的变化模型。正式和非正式的反馈表明了积极的参与。CDA 过程涉及 80 个人日的额外时间(40 个来自 PPI 共同研究人员,40 个来自学术研究人员)。该过程被细化为最佳实践框架,包括准备、CDA 和应用阶段。
本研究开发了一种精神健康研究中定性数据分析的合作分析方法的分类法,从现有证据中确定了成功参与的特征,并开发、试点和完善了合作分析定性数据的第一个最佳实践框架。该框架有可能支持在定性精神健康研究背景下对数据分析进行有意义的 PPI,这是研究周期中以前被忽视但却至关重要的一部分。