Suppr超能文献

詹姆斯·林德联盟优先事项设定合作伙伴关系的建议——一项定性访谈研究

Recommendations from a James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership - a qualitative interview study.

作者信息

Jongsma Karin, van Seventer Juliette, Verwoerd Anouk, van Rensen Annemiek

机构信息

Department of Medical Humanities, University Medical Center Utrecht, Julius Center for Health, Sciences and Primary Care, PO Box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Department of Paediatric Rheumatology and Immunology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, PO Box 85090, 3584, EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Nov 19;6(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00240-3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The James Lind Alliance (JLA) offers a method for research priority setting with patients, clinicians and carers. The method is increasingly used but publications primarily discuss the outcome of such projects, rather than reflecting on the JLA method itself. Scrutiny of the method is crucial in order to understand and correctly interpret its outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative interview study with people involved in a JLA project into Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) (n = 30) to better understand the mechanisms, procedures and decisional processes during such a project and to formulate recommendations for those who consider starting a JLA project in the future.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified: 1) motivations, goals and expectations 2) inclusivity, roles and representation 3) procedures and decision-making 4) outcomes and future steps.

CONCLUSION

While the top 10 of 'evidence uncertainties' seems to take the centre stage in JLA projects, the ways in which these priorities are determined may be influenced by 'process uncertainties'. We have formulated ten specific recommendations for future JLA projects. Reflection on and reporting of these process uncertainties would contribute to the improvement of JLA projects and increase the validity of the outcome of such projects.

摘要

背景

詹姆斯·林德联盟(JLA)提供了一种与患者、临床医生和护理人员共同确定研究优先级的方法。该方法的使用越来越广泛,但相关出版物主要讨论此类项目的结果,而非对JLA方法本身进行反思。对该方法进行审查对于理解和正确解释其结果至关重要。

方法

我们对参与JLA青少年特发性关节炎(JIA)项目的人员(n = 30)进行了定性访谈研究,以更好地了解此类项目中的机制、程序和决策过程,并为那些考虑未来启动JLA项目的人提出建议。

结果

确定了四个主要主题:1)动机、目标和期望;2)包容性、角色和代表性;3)程序和决策;4)结果和未来步骤。

结论

虽然“证据不确定性”的前10项似乎在JLA项目中占据核心地位,但确定这些优先级的方式可能会受到“过程不确定性”的影响。我们为未来的JLA项目制定了十条具体建议。对这些过程不确定性进行反思和报告将有助于改进JLA项目,并提高此类项目结果的有效性。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
Patient Representation: Mind the Gap Between Individual and Collective Claims.
Am J Bioeth. 2020 May;20(4):28-30. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1730519.
10
Patient engagement in research: a systematic review.患者参与研究:一项系统评价。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-89.

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