• 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

关注差距:确定在研究项目启动前阶段促进公众和患者参与的价值观。

Minding the gap: identifying values to enable public and patient involvement at the pre-commencement stage of research projects.

作者信息

Ní Shé Éidín, Cassidy Jennifer, Davies Carmel, De Brún Aoife, Donnelly Sarah, Dorris Emma, Dunne Nikki, Egan Karen, Foley Michel, Galvin Mary, Harkin Mary, Killilea Martha, Kroll Thilo, Lacey Vanessa, Lambert Veronica, McLoughlin Sarah, Mitchell Derick, Murphy Edel, Mwendwa Purity, Nicholson Emma, O'Donnell Deirdre, O'Philbin Laura

机构信息

School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.

Irish Research Council, Dublin, Ireland.

出版信息

Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Aug 3;6:46. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00220-7. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.1186/s40900-020-00220-7
PMID:32765898
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7396939/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The University College Dublin (UCD) Public and Patient Invovlement (PPI) ignite program is focused on embedding PPI in health and social care related research, education and training, professional practice and administration. During a PPI knowledge sharing event challenges were noted during the pre-commencement stage of research projects. This stage includes the time before a research projects/partnership starts or when funding is being applied for. As a response, we agreed there was a need to spend time developing a values-based approach to be used from the pre-commencement of PPI projects and partnerships. Values are deeply held ideals that people consider to be important. They are vital in shaping our attitudes and motivating our choices and behaviours.

METHODS

Using independent facilitators, we invited a diverse group of participants to a full-day workshop in February. During the workshop, the concept of a values statement and values-based approaches was introduced. The group via a majority consensus, agreed on a core set of values and a shared understanding of them. After the workshop, a draft was shared with participants for further comment and final agreement.

RESULTS

The workshop had 22 people representing experts by experience, PPI charity partners, funders, academics and national PPI Ignite partners. The group via consensus identified four values of respect, openness, reciprocity and flexibility for the pre-commencement stage. A frequently reported experience of PPI partners was that some felt that the pre-commencement activities appeared at times like a performance; an act that had to be completed in order to move to the next stage rather than a genuine interest in a mutually beneficial partnership. Being open and transparent with all invovled that the funding application may not be successful was stressed. Another important feature related to 'openness' was the 'spaces' and 'places' in which meetings between partners could occur in an accessible and equitable way. The issue of 'space' is particularly critical for the involvement of seldom heard groups. The benefits of the research are often clear for academics, but for PPI partners, these are often less certain. To achieve reciprocity, academic and PPI partners need to engage in a timely, repeated and transparent dialogue to achieve beneficial outcomes for all stakeholders. Being open to new inputs and differing modes of knowledge and ideas was also stressed. For some, this will require a change in attitudes and behaviours and should result in more collective decision making. Several areas were identified using the four values.

CONCLUSIONS

This work via majority consensus identified four values of respect, openness, reciprocity, and flexibility for the pre-commencement stage. These values should be used to support inclusive, effective and collective PPI across all stages of involvement. We hope this work will stimulate further action in this area. In particular, we would welcome the evaluation of these values involving diverse PPI groups.

摘要

背景

都柏林大学学院(UCD)公众与患者参与(PPI)点燃计划专注于将公众与患者参与融入与健康和社会护理相关的研究、教育与培训、专业实践及管理中。在一次PPI知识分享活动中,人们注意到研究项目启动前阶段存在一些挑战。这个阶段包括研究项目/合作开始前或申请资金的时候。作为回应,我们一致认为有必要花时间制定一种基于价值观的方法,以便在PPI项目和合作启动前使用。价值观是人们认为重要的根深蒂固的理想。它们对于塑造我们的态度以及激发我们的选择和行为至关重要。

方法

在2月,我们邀请了不同类型的参与者参加由独立主持人主持的全天研讨会。在研讨会上,介绍了价值观声明和基于价值观的方法的概念。该小组通过多数人达成共识,确定了一组核心价值观以及对这些价值观的共同理解。研讨会结束后,将一份草案分发给参与者以供进一步评论和最终确定。

结果

该研讨会有22人参加,代表了有经验的专家、PPI慈善合作伙伴、资助者、学者以及国家PPI点燃计划合作伙伴。该小组通过协商一致确定了项目启动前阶段的四个价值观,即尊重、开放、互惠和灵活。PPI合作伙伴经常提到的一种经历是,有些人觉得启动前的活动有时像是一场表演;是为了进入下一阶段而必须完成的行为,而不是对互利合作真正感兴趣。强调要对所有相关方坦诚透明地说明资金申请可能不会成功。与“开放”相关的另一个重要特征是合作伙伴之间能够以方便且公平的方式进行会面的“空间”和“场所”。“空间”问题对于很少被倾听的群体的参与尤为关键。研究带来的好处对学者来说往往很明显,但对PPI合作伙伴来说,这些好处往往不太确定。为了实现互惠,学术和PPI合作伙伴需要及时、反复且透明地进行对话,以实现所有利益相关者的有益结果。还强调要对新的投入以及不同的知识和思想模式持开放态度。对一些人来说,这将需要态度和行为的改变,并应导致更多的集体决策。利用这四个价值观确定了几个领域。

结论

这项工作通过多数人达成共识,确定了项目启动前阶段的四个价值观,即尊重、开放、互惠和灵活。这些价值观应被用于支持在参与的所有阶段实现包容性、有效的集体公众与患者参与。我们希望这项工作将激发该领域的进一步行动。特别是,我们欢迎对这些价值观进行涉及不同PPI群体的评估。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/8786c012bd00/40900_2020_220_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/6d6c6dde4b47/40900_2020_220_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/65555ecb607e/40900_2020_220_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/8786c012bd00/40900_2020_220_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/6d6c6dde4b47/40900_2020_220_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/65555ecb607e/40900_2020_220_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5aa0/7397621/8786c012bd00/40900_2020_220_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Minding the gap: identifying values to enable public and patient involvement at the pre-commencement stage of research projects.关注差距:确定在研究项目启动前阶段促进公众和患者参与的价值观。
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Aug 3;6:46. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00220-7. eCollection 2020.
2
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
3
Exploring the "how" in research partnerships with young partners by experience: lessons learned in six projects from Canada, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom.通过经验探索与年轻伙伴建立研究合作关系的“方式”:从加拿大、荷兰和英国的六个项目中吸取的经验教训。
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Nov 17;8(1):62. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00400-7.
4
A framework for more equitable, diverse, and inclusive Patient and Public Involvement for palliative care research.一个用于姑息治疗研究的更公平、多元和包容的患者及公众参与框架。
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Feb 8;10(1):19. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00525-3.
5
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
6
Learning to work together - lessons from a reflective analysis of a research project on public involvement.学会协同合作——一项关于公众参与的研究项目反思性分析的经验教训
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Jan 9;3:1. doi: 10.1186/s40900-016-0051-x. eCollection 2017.
7
Involving carer advisors in evidence synthesis to improve carers' mental health during end-of-life home care: co-production during COVID-19 remote working.让护理顾问参与证据综合工作以改善临终居家护理期间护理人员的心理健康:新冠疫情远程工作期间的共同制作。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2023 Oct;13(8):1-48. doi: 10.3310/TGHH6428.
8
The value of involving patients and public in health services research and evaluation: a qualitative study.让患者和公众参与卫生服务研究与评估的价值:一项定性研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Jun 29;7(1):49. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00289-8.
9
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.医院环境中患者与护士以患者为中心的沟通体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072.
10
Sharing space at the research table: exploring public and patient involvement in a methodology priority setting partnership.在研究桌上共享空间:探索公众和患者参与方法学优先事项设定伙伴关系。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 May 2;9(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00438-1.

引用本文的文献

1
Validating and prioritizing prenatal breastfeeding education recommendations: A nominal group technique study with postnatal mothers and healthcare professionals.验证产前母乳喂养教育建议并确定其优先级:一项针对产后母亲和医护人员的名义小组技术研究。
PLoS One. 2025 Jul 16;20(7):e0328542. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0328542. eCollection 2025.
2
Cocreating a programme to prevent injuries and improve performance in Australian Police Force recruits: consumer, industry partner and researcher involvement protocol.共同创建一个预防澳大利亚警察部队新兵受伤并提高其体能表现的项目:消费者、行业合作伙伴及研究人员参与协议。
BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2025 May 26;11(2):e002632. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2025-002632. eCollection 2025.
3

本文引用的文献

1
The Possibilities and Limits of "Co-producing" Research.“共同开展”研究的可能性与局限性
Front Sociol. 2019 Apr 5;4:23. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2019.00023. eCollection 2019.
2
Public involvement in health research: what does 'good' look like in practice?公众参与健康研究:在实践中“良好”的表现是怎样的?
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Mar 31;6:11. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-0183-x. eCollection 2020.
3
Producing co-production: Reflections on the development of a complex intervention.协同生产:对复杂干预措施发展的反思。
Processes Underpinning Successful Co-Design: Lessons From a Digital Health Project.
成功协同设计的基础流程:来自一个数字健康项目的经验教训
Health Expect. 2025 Jun;28(3):e70272. doi: 10.1111/hex.70272.
4
Patient and public involvement in the design of an international clinical trial: real world experience.患者及公众参与国际临床试验设计:真实世界经验
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Nov 6;10(1):117. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00642-7.
5
Evaluating a grant development public involvement funding scheme: a qualitative document analysis.评估一项资助项目开发公众参与资助计划:定性文献分析
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Jun 10;10(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00588-w.
6
Is the Invisibility of Dementia a Super-Power or a Curse? A Reflection on the SUNshiners' Questionnaire into the Public Understanding of Dementia as an Invisible Disability: A User-Led Research Project.痴呆症的隐匿性是一种超能力还是一种诅咒?对阳光调查小组关于公众对痴呆症作为一种隐匿性残疾的理解的问卷的反思:一个由用户主导的研究项目。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024 Apr 10;21(4):466. doi: 10.3390/ijerph21040466.
7
Trust in embedding co-design for innovation and change: considering the role of senior leaders and managers.信任嵌入式共同设计以促进创新和变革:考虑高级领导和管理者的角色。
J Health Organ Manag. 2024 Feb 21;38(9):36-44. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-07-2023-0207.
8
Potentials and challenges of using co-design in health services research in low- and middle-income countries.在中低收入国家的卫生服务研究中使用共同设计的潜力和挑战。
Glob Health Res Policy. 2023 Mar 13;8(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41256-023-00290-6.
9
Research Buddy partnership in a MD-PhD program: lessons learned.医学博士-哲学博士项目中的研究伙伴关系:经验教训
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Feb 18;9(1):4. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00414-9.
10
Flourishing together: research protocol for developing methods to better include disabled people's knowledge in health policy development.共同繁荣:制定更好地将残疾人士知识纳入卫生政策制定方法的研究方案。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Oct 17;22(1):1252. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08655-2.
Health Expect. 2020 Jun;23(3):659-669. doi: 10.1111/hex.13046. Epub 2020 Mar 31.
4
Enabling public, patient and practitioner involvement in co-designing frailty pathways in the acute care setting.促进公众、患者和从业者参与急性护理环境中虚弱途径的共同设计。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Nov 5;19(1):797. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4626-8.
5
Beyond translation: Engaging with culturally and linguistically diverse consumers.超越翻译:与文化和语言多样化的消费者互动。
Health Expect. 2020 Feb;23(1):159-168. doi: 10.1111/hex.12984. Epub 2019 Oct 18.
6
Embedding patient and public involvement: Managing tacit and explicit expectations.嵌入患者和公众参与:管理隐性和显性期望。
Health Expect. 2019 Dec;22(6):1231-1239. doi: 10.1111/hex.12952. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
7
Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: Systematic review and co-design pilot.支持患者和公众参与研究的框架:系统评价与协同设计试点
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):785-801. doi: 10.1111/hex.12888. Epub 2019 Apr 22.
8
Facilitators and barriers to co-research by people with dementia and academic researchers: Findings from a qualitative study.痴呆症患者与学术研究人员共同开展研究的促进因素和障碍:一项定性研究的结果
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):761-771. doi: 10.1111/hex.12891. Epub 2019 Apr 22.
9
Clarifying the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research: A collaborative rapid realist review process.阐明使鲜少被听见的群体能够互惠参与健康和社会关怀研究的机制和资源:合作式快速务实主义审查过程。
Health Expect. 2019 Jun;22(3):298-306. doi: 10.1111/hex.12865. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
10
Regional working in the East of England: using the UK National Standards for Public Involvement.英格兰东部的区域工作:采用英国公众参与国家标准。
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 Dec 6;4:48. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0130-2. eCollection 2018.