Suppr超能文献

英格兰东部的区域工作:采用英国公众参与国家标准。

Regional working in the East of England: using the UK National Standards for Public Involvement.

作者信息

Mathie Elspeth, Wythe Helena, Munday Diane, Rhodes Graham, Vicary Penny, Millac Paul, Jones Julia

机构信息

1Centre for Research in Public Health and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB UK.

2Public Involvement in Research group (PIRg), CRIPACC, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB UK.

出版信息

Res Involv Engagem. 2018 Dec 6;4:48. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0130-2. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

Involving patients and members of the public to help shape and carry out research is recommended in health research in the United Kingdom (UK). There are a number of regional networks of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) groups, which support the collaboration between researchers, patients and public members. We are a group of researchers, patients and public members who came together via a PPI regional network in the East of England to collaborate on a research study about the extent of feedback from researchers to PPI contributors.The aim of this paper is to use the recently developed UK National Standards for Public Involvement to structure our thinking about what worked well and what did not, within our recently completed study. We believe this paper is one of the first to use the National Standards to structure a retrospective reflection on PPI within a study.Our findings showed that there are benefits of regional working, including easier access to public members and bringing together researchers, public members and those who run PPI groups for research collaboration. The main challenges included involvement of people before studies are funded and working across organisations with different payment processes.The National Standards for Public Involvement has provided a useful framework to consider how best to involve patients and members of the public in research and could be a helpful structure to reflect on successes and challenges in individual projects and also regional, national or international comparisons of PPI in research.

ABSTRACT

Regional networks of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) organisations, including academic institutions, health and social care services, charities, patient and public groups and individuals, can play an important part in carrying out health research. In the UK, recommendations by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) encourage the use of regional, collaborative networks with shared resources and training. The newly developed UK National Standards for Public Involvement were used as a framework for a retrospective reflection of PPI within a recently completed research study which focused on feedback from researchers to PPI contributors. PPI contributors, those running PPI groups (PPI leads) and researchers involved in the study have contributed to this reflection by completing evaluation forms throughout the research alongside notes of meetings and co-authors' final reflections. Results revealed a number of successes where the regional network was particularly useful in bringing together PPI contributors, those who lead PPI groups and researchers. The regional network helped researchers to get in touch with patients and members of the public. Challenges included involving people before funding and bureaucratic and financial barriers when working across different organisations in the region. The importance of working together in flexible, informal ways was key and on-going support for the PPI contributors was vital for continued involvement, including emotional support not just monetary. The first four National Standards of inclusive opportunities, working together, support and learning and communications were particularly useful as means of structuring our reflections. To our knowledge, this is one of the first research studies to use the UK National Standards for Public Involvement as a framework to identify what worked well and the challenges of PPI processes. It is suggested that as more reflective papers are published and the National Standards are more widely used in the UK, many lessons can be learnt and shared on how to improve our Patient and Public Involvement within research studies. Evaluations or reflections such as these can further enhance our understanding of PPI with implications for regional, national and international comparisons.

摘要

通俗易懂的总结

在英国的健康研究中,建议让患者和公众参与进来,以帮助塑造和开展研究。有许多患者和公众参与(PPI)团体的区域网络,这些网络支持研究人员、患者和公众成员之间的合作。我们是一群研究人员、患者和公众成员,通过英格兰东部的一个PPI区域网络聚集在一起,合作开展一项关于研究人员向PPI贡献者反馈程度的研究。本文的目的是利用最近制定的英国公众参与国家标准,来梳理我们对在最近完成的研究中哪些方面做得好、哪些方面做得不好的思考。我们认为本文是首批利用该标准对研究中的PPI进行回顾性反思的文章之一。我们的研究结果表明,区域合作有诸多益处,包括更容易接触到公众成员,以及将研究人员、公众成员和运营PPI团体的人员聚集在一起进行研究合作。主要挑战包括在研究获得资助之前让人们参与进来,以及在不同支付流程的组织间开展工作。公众参与国家标准提供了一个有用的框架,以考虑如何最好地让患者和公众参与研究,并且可以成为一个有助于反思单个项目以及区域、国家或国际研究中PPI的成功与挑战的结构。

摘要

患者和公众参与(PPI)组织的区域网络,包括学术机构、健康和社会护理服务机构、慈善机构、患者和公众团体及个人,在开展健康研究中可以发挥重要作用。在英国,国家卫生研究院(NIHR)的建议鼓励使用具有共享资源和培训的区域合作网络。新制定的英国公众参与国家标准被用作一个框架,对最近完成的一项研究中的PPI进行回顾性反思,该研究聚焦于研究人员向PPI贡献者的反馈。PPI贡献者、运营PPI团体的人员(PPI负责人)以及参与该研究的研究人员,通过在整个研究过程中填写评估表以及会议记录和共同作者的最终反思,为此次反思做出了贡献。结果显示了一些成功之处,即区域网络在聚集PPI贡献者、PPI团体负责人和研究人员方面特别有用。区域网络帮助研究人员与患者和公众取得联系。挑战包括在获得资助之前让人们参与进来,以及在该地区不同组织间开展工作时遇到的官僚和财务障碍。以灵活、非正式的方式合作的重要性是关键,对PPI贡献者的持续支持对于他们持续参与至关重要,包括情感支持而非仅仅是金钱支持。包容性机会、合作、支持与学习以及沟通这前四项国家标准,作为梳理我们反思的方式特别有用。据我们所知,这是首批将英国公众参与国家标准作为框架来确定PPI过程中哪些方面做得好以及面临哪些挑战的研究之一。建议随着更多反思性文章的发表以及该标准在英国更广泛地使用,可以学到并分享许多关于如何在研究中改进患者和公众参与的经验教训。这样的评估或反思可以进一步增进我们对PPI的理解,对区域、国家和国际比较都有影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5438/6282308/23407662d1f2/40900_2018_130_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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