Suppr超能文献

社区合作伙伴对评估利益相关者参与的项目的反应:衡量发展中的认知反应测试。

Community partners' responses to items assessing stakeholder engagement: Cognitive response testing in measure development.

机构信息

Washington University in St. Louis, Brown School, St. Louis, MI, United States of America.

Washington University in St. Louis, School of Medicine, St. Louis, MI, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Nov 23;15(11):e0241839. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241839. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite recognition of the importance of stakeholder input into research, there is a lack of validated measures to assess how well constituencies are engaged and their input integrated into research design. Measurement theory suggests that a community engagement measure should use clear and simple language and capture important components of underlying constructs, resulting in a valid measure that is accessible to a broad audience.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate how community members understood and responded to a measure of community engagement developed to be reliable, valid, easily administered, and broadly usable.

METHOD

Cognitive response interviews were completed, during which participants described their reactions to items and how they processed them. Participants were asked to interpret item meaning, paraphrase items, and identify difficult or problematic terms and phrases, as well as provide any concerns with response options while responding to 16 of 32 survey items.

RESULTS

The results of the cognitive response interviews of participants (N = 16) suggest concerns about plain language and literacy, clarity of question focus, and the lack of context clues to facilitate processing in response to items querying research experience. Minimal concerns were related to response options. Participants suggested changes in words and terms, as well as item structure.

CONCLUSION

Qualitative research can improve the validity and accessibility of measures that assess stakeholder experience of community-engaged research. The findings suggest wording and sentence structure changes that improve ability to assess implementation of community engagement and its impact on research outcomes.

摘要

背景

尽管人们认识到利益相关者参与研究的重要性,但缺乏经过验证的措施来评估利益相关者的参与程度以及将其投入融入研究设计的程度。测量理论表明,社区参与度测量应该使用清晰简洁的语言,并捕捉到潜在结构的重要组成部分,从而得出一个对广泛受众具有可及性的有效测量。

目的

本研究的主要目的是评估社区成员如何理解和回应为可靠、有效、易于管理和广泛使用而开发的社区参与度测量。

方法

进行认知反应访谈,在此期间,参与者描述了他们对项目的反应以及如何处理这些项目。要求参与者解释项目含义、改写项目、识别困难或有问题的术语和短语,并在回答 32 个调查项目中的 16 个项目时对回答选项提出任何关注。

结果

对 16 名参与者(N=16)的认知反应访谈结果表明,对语言和文化素养、问题焦点的清晰度以及缺乏上下文线索以促进对查询研究经验的项目的处理存在关注。与回答选项相关的关注最小。参与者提出了在措辞和术语方面的更改,以及项目结构的更改。

结论

定性研究可以提高评估利益相关者参与社区参与式研究的体验的措施的有效性和可及性。研究结果表明,措辞和句子结构的变化可以提高评估社区参与实施及其对研究结果的影响的能力。

相似文献

1
Community partners' responses to items assessing stakeholder engagement: Cognitive response testing in measure development.
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 23;15(11):e0241839. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241839. eCollection 2020.
2
4
Content validation of a quantitative stakeholder engagement measure.
J Community Psychol. 2019 Nov;47(8):1937-1951. doi: 10.1002/jcop.22239. Epub 2019 Sep 2.
8
[The estimation of premorbid intelligence levels in French speakers].
Encephale. 2005 Jan-Feb;31(1 Pt 1):31-43. doi: 10.1016/s0013-7006(05)82370-x.
9
EVALUATING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN RESEARCH: QUANTITATIVE MEASURE DEVELOPMENT.
J Community Psychol. 2017 Jan;45(1):17-32. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21828. Epub 2016 Dec 13.
10
A taxonomy of impacts on clinical and translational research from community stakeholder engagement.
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):731-742. doi: 10.1111/hex.12937. Epub 2019 Jul 18.

引用本文的文献

2
Construct validation of the Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST).
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Jun 16;8(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00360-y.
3
Development and Co-design of NeuroOrb: A Novel "Serious Gaming" System Targeting Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson's Disease.
Front Aging Neurosci. 2022 Mar 29;14:728212. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.728212. eCollection 2022.
4
A Study Examining the Usefulness of a New Measure of Research Engagement.
J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Apr;37(Suppl 1):50-56. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-06993-1. Epub 2022 Mar 29.
5
Development and Validation of a Brief Version of the Research Engagement Survey Tool.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Sep 23;18(19):10020. doi: 10.3390/ijerph181910020.

本文引用的文献

1
Reaching Consensus on Principles of Stakeholder Engagement in Research.
Prog Community Health Partnersh. 2020;14(1):117-127. doi: 10.1353/cpr.2020.0014.
2
Content validation of a quantitative stakeholder engagement measure.
J Community Psychol. 2019 Nov;47(8):1937-1951. doi: 10.1002/jcop.22239. Epub 2019 Sep 2.
3
EVALUATING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT IN RESEARCH: QUANTITATIVE MEASURE DEVELOPMENT.
J Community Psychol. 2017 Jan;45(1):17-32. doi: 10.1002/jcop.21828. Epub 2016 Dec 13.
4
Systematic Review of Quantitative Measures of Stakeholder Engagement.
Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Sep;10(5):314-336. doi: 10.1111/cts.12474. Epub 2017 May 29.
6
Increasing research literacy: the community research fellows training program.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Feb;10(1):3-12. doi: 10.1177/1556264614561959. Epub 2014 Dec 10.
9
The analysis and interpretation of cognitive interviews for instrument development.
Res Nurs Health. 2007 Apr;30(2):224-34. doi: 10.1002/nur.20195.
10
Development of a measure to assess patient trust in medical researchers.
Ann Fam Med. 2006 May-Jun;4(3):247-52. doi: 10.1370/afm.541.

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