• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

患者、临床医生和研究人员共同努力改善心血管健康:一项关于以患者为导向研究的障碍和优先事项的定性研究

Patients, clinicians and researchers working together to improve cardiovascular health: a qualitative study of barriers and priorities for patient-oriented research.

作者信息

Santana Maria-Jose, Zelinsky Sandra, Ahmed Sadia, Doktorchik Chelsea, James Matthew, Wilton Stephen, Quan Hude, Fernandez Nicolas, Anderson Todd, Butalia Sonia

机构信息

Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 6;10(2):e031187. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031187.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031187
PMID:32034018
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7044837/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The overall goal of this study is to identify priorities for cardiovascular (CV) health research that are important to patients and clinician-researchers. We brought together a group of CV patients and clinician-researchers new to patient-oriented research (POR), to build a multidisciplinary POR team and form an advisory committee for the Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta.

DESIGN

This qualitative POR used a participatory health research paradigm to work with participants in eliciting their priorities. Therefore, participants were involved in priority setting, and analysis of findings. Participants also developed a plan for continued engagement to support POR in CV health research.

SETTING

Libin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 23 participants, including patients and family caregivers (n=12) and clinician-researchers (n=11).

RESULTS

Participants identified barriers and facilitators to POR in CV health (lack of awareness of POR and poor understanding on the role of patients) and 10 research priorities for improving CV health. The CV health research priorities include: (1) CV disease prediction and prevention, (2) access to CV care, (3) communication with providers, (4) use of eHealth technology, (5) patient experiences in healthcare, (6) patient engagement, (7) transitions and continuity of CV care, (8) integrated CV care, (9) development of structures for patient-to-patient support and (10) research on rare heart diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, research priorities were identified by patients and clinician-researchers working together to improve CV health. Future research programme and projects will be developed to address these priorities. A key output of this study is the creation of the patient advisory council that will provide support and will work with clinician-researchers to improve CV health.

摘要

目的

本研究的总体目标是确定对患者和临床研究人员而言重要的心血管(CV)健康研究重点。我们召集了一组CV患者以及刚接触以患者为导向研究(POR)的临床研究人员,组建了一个多学科POR团队,并为艾伯塔省利宾心血管研究所成立了一个咨询委员会。

设计

这项定性POR采用参与式健康研究范式,与参与者共同确定他们的研究重点。因此,参与者参与了重点确定和结果分析。参与者还制定了持续参与计划,以支持CV健康研究中的POR。

地点

加拿大卡尔加里大学卡明医学院艾伯塔省利宾心血管研究所。

参与者

共有23名参与者,包括患者及其家庭护理人员(n = 12)和临床研究人员(n = 11)。

结果

参与者确定了CV健康领域POR的障碍和促进因素(对POR缺乏认识以及对患者角色理解不足)以及改善CV健康的10个研究重点。CV健康研究重点包括:(1)CV疾病预测与预防;(2)获得CV护理;(3)与医疗服务提供者的沟通;(4)电子健康技术的使用;(5)患者的医疗保健体验;(6)患者参与;(7)CV护理的过渡与连续性;(8)综合CV护理;(9)建立患者间支持结构;(10)罕见心脏病研究。

结论

在本研究中,患者和临床研究人员共同确定了改善CV健康的研究重点。未来将制定研究计划和项目以解决这些重点。本研究的一项关键成果是成立了患者咨询委员会,该委员会将提供支持,并与临床研究人员合作以改善CV健康。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7d68/7044837/79ebf1459d5c/bmjopen-2019-031187f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7d68/7044837/670526e11479/bmjopen-2019-031187f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7d68/7044837/79ebf1459d5c/bmjopen-2019-031187f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7d68/7044837/670526e11479/bmjopen-2019-031187f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7d68/7044837/79ebf1459d5c/bmjopen-2019-031187f02.jpg

相似文献

1
Patients, clinicians and researchers working together to improve cardiovascular health: a qualitative study of barriers and priorities for patient-oriented research.患者、临床医生和研究人员共同努力改善心血管健康:一项关于以患者为导向研究的障碍和优先事项的定性研究
BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 6;10(2):e031187. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031187.
2
Working together in health research: a mixed-methods patient engagement evaluation.健康研究中的合作:一项混合方法的患者参与度评估
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Aug 1;9(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00475-w.
3
Patient Engagement Partnerships in Clinical Trials: Development of Patient Partner and Investigator Decision Aids.临床试验中的患者参与伙伴关系:患者伙伴和研究者决策辅助工具的开发。
Patient. 2020 Dec;13(6):745-756. doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00460-5. Epub 2020 Oct 7.
4
Beyond the role of participant: a firsthand account of the experiences of a patient-oriented research team.超越参与者角色:以患者为导向的研究团队经历的第一手记述
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Nov 7;7(1):79. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00323-9.
5
Patient and caregiver perspectives on virtual care: a patient-oriented qualitative study.患者和照护者对虚拟医疗的看法:一项以患者为导向的定性研究。
CMAJ Open. 2022 Mar 1;10(1):E165-E172. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20210065. Print 2022 Jan-Mar.
6
How to engage patients in research and quality improvement in community-based primary care settings: protocol for a participatory action research pilot study.如何让患者参与社区基层医疗环境中的研究和质量改进:一项参与式行动研究试点研究方案
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 Oct 1;4:30. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0113-3. eCollection 2018.
7
Youth engagement in research: exploring training needs of youth with neurodevelopmental disabilities.青少年参与研究:探索神经发育障碍青少年的培训需求。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Jul 10;9(1):50. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00452-3.
8
Patient-oriented research competencies in health (PORCH) for researchers, patients, healthcare providers, and decision-makers: results of a scoping review.面向研究人员、患者、医疗服务提供者和决策者的健康领域以患者为导向的研究能力(PORCH):一项范围综述的结果
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Feb 10;6:4. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-0180-0. eCollection 2020.
9
Long-term views on chronic kidney disease research priorities among stakeholders engaged in a priority-setting partnership: A qualitative study.利益相关者参与优先事项设定伙伴关系对慢性肾脏病研究重点的长期看法:一项定性研究。
Health Expect. 2018 Dec;21(6):1142-1149. doi: 10.1111/hex.12818. Epub 2018 Aug 15.
10
What matters most to patients about primary healthcare: mixed-methods patient priority setting exercises within the PREFeR (PRioritiEs For Research) project.患者对初级医疗保健最关心的是什么:在 PREFeR(研究优先事项)项目中使用混合方法进行患者优先事项设定练习。
BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 9;9(7):e025954. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025954.

引用本文的文献

1
Individualized Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures As a Communication Aid in Outpatient Cardiology Care: A Study Protocol.个体化电子患者报告结局测量作为门诊心脏病护理中的沟通辅助工具:一项研究方案
CJC Open. 2025 Feb 18;7(5):678-685. doi: 10.1016/j.cjco.2025.02.009. eCollection 2025 May.
2
Health researchers' experience collaborating with patient partners: a qualitative study.健康研究人员与患者合作伙伴合作的经验:一项定性研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2025 May 15;11(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s40900-025-00730-2.
3
Codesigning person-centred quality indicators with diverse communities: A qualitative patient engagement study.

本文引用的文献

1
Call to Action: Urgent Challenges in Cardiovascular Disease: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.行动呼吁:心血管疾病的紧迫挑战:美国心脏协会的总统咨询意见。
Circulation. 2019 Feb 26;139(9):e44-e54. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000652.
2
Patient and public engagement in priority setting: A systematic rapid review of the literature.患者和公众参与优先事项设定:文献系统快速综述。
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 2;13(3):e0193579. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193579. eCollection 2018.
3
How to practice person-centred care: A conceptual framework.
与多元化社区共同设计以人为本的质量指标:一项定性的患者参与研究。
Health Expect. 2022 Oct;25(5):2188-2202. doi: 10.1111/hex.13388. Epub 2021 Dec 2.
4
Patient Experience After Risk Stratification and Follow-up for Acute Kidney Injury After Cardiac Catheterization: Patient Survey.心脏导管插入术后急性肾损伤风险分层与随访后的患者体验:患者调查
CJC Open. 2020 Nov 12;3(3):337-344. doi: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.10.019. eCollection 2021 Mar.
5
Patient-led use of patient-reported outcome measure in self-Management of a Rotator Cuff Injury.患者主导的患者报告结局量表在肩袖损伤自我管理中的应用
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2021 Jan 13;5(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s41687-020-00283-w.
6
Barriers and Facilitators to Using Statins: A Qualitative Study With Patients and Family Physicians.使用他汀类药物的障碍与促进因素:一项针对患者和家庭医生的定性研究
CJC Open. 2020 Jul 4;2(6):530-538. doi: 10.1016/j.cjco.2020.07.002. eCollection 2020 Nov.
7
Strategies for enhancing the initiation of cholesterol lowering medication among patients at high cardiovascular disease risk: a qualitative descriptive exploration of patient and general practitioners' perspectives on a facilitated relay intervention in Alberta, Canada.提高高心血管疾病风险患者降脂药物起始率的策略:加拿大阿尔伯塔省促进接力干预措施中患者和全科医生观点的定性描述性探索。
BMJ Open. 2020 Nov 24;10(11):e038469. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-038469.
8
Optimizing Patient-Reported Experiences for Cardiovascular Disease: Current Landscape and Future Opportunities.优化心血管疾病患者报告的体验:现状与未来机遇
Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2020 Jul-Sep;16(3):220-224. doi: 10.14797/mdcj-16-3-220.
如何实践以患者为中心的护理:概念框架。
Health Expect. 2018 Apr;21(2):429-440. doi: 10.1111/hex.12640. Epub 2017 Nov 19.
4
Hypertension management research priorities from patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers: A report from the Hypertension Canada Priority Setting Partnership Group.患者、护理人员和医疗服务提供者对高血压管理的研究重点:来自加拿大高血压优先事项设定合作组织的报告。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017 Nov;19(11):1063-1069. doi: 10.1111/jch.13091. Epub 2017 Sep 25.
5
Engaging patients in health research: identifying research priorities through community town halls.让患者参与健康研究:通过社区市政厅会议确定研究重点。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Mar 11;17(1):192. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2138-y.
6
Engaging Patients and Clinicians in Establishing Research Priorities for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.让患者和临床医生参与制定妊娠期糖尿病的研究重点。
Can J Diabetes. 2017 Apr;41(2):156-163. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjd.2016.08.219. Epub 2016 Nov 21.
7
Patient engagement: What partnering with patient in research is all about.患者参与:与患者合作开展研究的全部内容。
Thromb Res. 2017 Feb;150:113-120. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2016.10.029. Epub 2016 Oct 28.
8
Adapting the nominal group technique for priority setting of evidence-practice gaps in implementation science.调整名义组技术以确定实施科学中证据与实践差距的优先级。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Aug 26;16(1):110. doi: 10.1186/s12874-016-0210-7.
9
Continuous patient engagement in cardiovascular disease clinical comparative effectiveness research.患者持续参与心血管疾病临床比较效果研究。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2016;16(2):193-8. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2016.1163222.
10
Top ten research priorities for spinal cord injury: the methodology and results of a British priority setting partnership.脊髓损伤的十大研究重点:英国优先事项设定伙伴关系的方法与结果
Spinal Cord. 2016 May;54(5):341-6. doi: 10.1038/sc.2015.199. Epub 2015 Nov 10.