Mills Geoffrey D, LaNoue Marianna, Gentsch Alexzandra T, Doty Amanda M B, Cunningham Amy, Nord Garrison, Rising Kristin L
Department of Family and Community Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, 833 Chestnut Street, Suite 301, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
College of Population Health, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2019 Aug 15;3(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s41687-019-0147-9.
Group concept mapping (GCM) is a research method that engages stakeholders in generating, structuring and representing ideas around a specific topic or question. GCM has been used with patients to answer questions related to health and disease but little is known about the patient experience as a participant in the process. This paper explores the patient experience participating in GCM as assessed with direct observation and surveys of participants.
This is a secondary analysis performed within a larger study in which 3 GCM iterations were performed to engage patients in identifying patient-important outcomes for diabetes care. Researchers tracked the frequency and type of assistance required by each participant to complete the sorting and rating steps of GCM. In addition, a 17-question patient experience survey was administered over the telephone to the participants after they had completed the GCM process. Survey questions asked about the personal impact of participating in GCM and the ease of various steps of the GCM process.
Researchers helped patients 92 times during the 3 GCM iterations, most commonly to address software and computer literacy issues, but also with the sorting phase itself. Of the 52 GCM participants, 40 completed the post-GCM survey. Respondents averaged 56 years of age, were 50% female and had an average hemoglobin A1c of 9.1%. Ninety-two percent (n = 37) of respondents felt that they had contributed something important to this research project and 90% (n = 36) agreed or strongly agreed that their efforts would help others with diabetes. Respondents reported that the brainstorming session was less difficult when compared with sorting and rating of statements.
Our results suggest that patients find value in participating in GCM. Patients reported less comfort with the sorting step of GCM when compared with brainstorming, an observation that correlates with our observations from the GCM sessions. Researchers should consider using paper sorting methods and objective measures of sorting quality when using GCM in patient-engaged research to improve the patient experience and concept map quality.
群体概念构图法(GCM)是一种让利益相关者围绕特定主题或问题提出、构建和表达想法的研究方法。GCM已被用于与患者一起回答与健康和疾病相关的问题,但对于患者作为该过程参与者的体验知之甚少。本文通过对参与者的直接观察和调查,探讨患者参与GCM的体验。
这是在一项更大规模研究中进行的二次分析,该研究进行了3次GCM迭代,让患者参与确定糖尿病护理中对患者重要的结果。研究人员跟踪了每个参与者完成GCM分类和评分步骤所需帮助的频率和类型。此外,在参与者完成GCM过程后,通过电话对他们进行了一项包含17个问题的患者体验调查。调查问题询问了参与GCM的个人影响以及GCM过程各个步骤的难易程度。
在3次GCM迭代过程中,研究人员帮助患者92次,最常见的是解决软件和计算机操作知识问题,也包括分类阶段本身的问题。在52名GCM参与者中,40人完成了GCM后的调查。受访者平均年龄为56岁,50%为女性,平均糖化血红蛋白水平为9.1%。92%(n = 37)的受访者认为他们对该研究项目做出了重要贡献,90%(n = 36)的受访者同意或强烈同意他们的努力将帮助其他糖尿病患者。受访者报告称,与陈述的分类和评分相比,头脑风暴环节难度较小。
我们的结果表明患者认为参与GCM有价值。与头脑风暴相比,患者报告称对GCM的分类步骤不太适应,这一观察结果与我们在GCM环节中的观察结果相关。在患者参与的研究中使用GCM时,研究人员应考虑采用纸质分类方法和分类质量的客观衡量标准,以改善患者体验和概念图质量。