• 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

在神经退行性疾病人群中进行焦点小组讨论:伦理和方法学考虑。

Conducting focus groups in neurodegenerative disease populations: ethical and methodological considerations.

机构信息

School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 13;11(1):e041869. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041869.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041869
PMID:33441358
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7812104/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Involvement of vulnerable populations in research is critical to inform the generalisability of evidence-based medicine to all groups of the population.

OBJECTIVE

In this communication, we reflect on our previous research, and that of other authors, to identify and explore key ethical and methodological considerations.

DISCUSSION

Focus groups are a widely implemented qualitative methodology, but their use, particularly in vulnerable neurodegenerative disease populations, is not straightforward. Although the risk of harm is generally low in focus group research, neurodegenerative disease populations are particularly vulnerable to issues relating to comprehension and their capacity to consent. Physical and cognitive impairments may also affect social interactions among participants and therefore impact data collection and analyses.

CONCLUSION

We offer a number of ethical and methodological recommendations to facilitate the processes of recruitment and data collection when conducting focus groups with neurodegenerative disease populations.

摘要

背景

让弱势群体参与研究对于将循证医学的证据推广到所有人群至关重要。

目的

在本通讯中,我们反思了我们以前的研究以及其他作者的研究,以确定和探讨关键的伦理和方法学考虑因素。

讨论

焦点小组是一种广泛实施的定性方法,但它们的使用,特别是在脆弱的神经退行性疾病人群中,并不简单。虽然焦点组研究中的伤害风险通常较低,但神经退行性疾病人群特别容易受到与理解和同意能力相关的问题的影响。身体和认知障碍也可能影响参与者之间的社会互动,从而影响数据收集和分析。

结论

我们提供了一些伦理和方法学建议,以促进在神经退行性疾病人群中进行焦点小组时的招募和数据收集过程。

相似文献

1
Conducting focus groups in neurodegenerative disease populations: ethical and methodological considerations.在神经退行性疾病人群中进行焦点小组讨论:伦理和方法学考虑。
BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 13;11(1):e041869. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041869.
2
Complex and alternate consent pathways in clinical trials: methodological and ethical challenges encountered by underserved groups and a call to action.临床试验中的复杂和替代同意途径:服务不足群体遇到的方法学和伦理挑战及行动呼吁。
Trials. 2023 Feb 28;24(1):151. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07159-6.
3
Special considerations in conducting bereavement focus groups.开展丧亲之痛焦点小组的特殊注意事项。
Omega (Westport). 2007;56(3):255-71. doi: 10.2190/om.56.3.c.
4
How ethical is ethical research? Recruiting marginalized, vulnerable groups into health services research.符合伦理的研究有多符合伦理?将边缘化、弱势群体纳入卫生服务研究。
J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(2):248-57. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04567.x.
5
Vulnerability in human research.人类研究中的脆弱性。
Monash Bioeth Rev. 2020 May;38(1):68-82. doi: 10.1007/s40592-020-00110-4.
6
Recruitment interventions for trials involving adults lacking capacity to consent: methodological and ethical considerations for designing Studies Within a Trial (SWATs).涉及无同意能力成年人的试验的招募干预措施:在试验内研究 (SWAT) 中进行研究的方法学和伦理学考虑。
Trials. 2022 Sep 6;23(1):756. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06705-y.
7
How informed is consent in vulnerable populations? Experience using a continuous consent process during the MDP301 vaginal microbicide trial in Mwanza, Tanzania.在弱势群体中,知情同意的程度如何?在坦桑尼亚姆万扎开展的 MDP301 阴道杀微生物剂试验中使用连续同意过程的经验。
BMC Med Ethics. 2010 Jun 13;11:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-11-10.
8
Literature review: considerations in undertaking focus group research with culturally and linguistically diverse groups.文献综述:针对文化和语言背景各异群体开展焦点小组研究的注意事项
J Clin Nurs. 2007 Jun;16(6):1000-11. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01760.x.
9
Conducting qualitative research with palliative care patients: applying Hammick's research ethics wheel.对姑息治疗患者进行定性研究:应用哈米克的研究伦理轮
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2010 Feb;16(2):58, 60-2, 64-6, 68. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2010.16.2.46751.
10
Ethical and logistical considerations of multicenter parental bereavement research.多中心父母丧亲之痛研究的伦理与后勤考量
J Palliat Med. 2008 Apr;11(3):444-50. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2007.0120.

引用本文的文献

1
Navigating Life With Parkinson's Disease: A Focus Group Study on Coping Strategies and Considerations for Self-Management Support.帕金森病患者的生活导航:一项关于应对策略及自我管理支持考量的焦点小组研究
J Adv Nurs. 2025 Apr;81(4):2003-2012. doi: 10.1111/jan.16414. Epub 2024 Sep 3.
2
Interventions facilitating the involvement of relatives of patients with acquired brain injury or malignant brain tumour: A scoping review.促进获得性脑损伤或恶性脑肿瘤患者亲属参与的干预措施:一项范围综述
J Clin Nurs. 2025 Mar;34(3):784-794. doi: 10.1111/jocn.17328. Epub 2024 Jul 30.
3
Rigorous Qualitative Research Involving Data Collected Remotely From People With Communication Disorders: Experience From a Telerehabilitation Trial.严格的定性研究涉及从有沟通障碍的人那里远程收集的数据:远程康复试验的经验。
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2022 Aug;36(8):557-564. doi: 10.1177/15459683221100489. Epub 2022 May 21.

本文引用的文献

1
'It's a tough decision': a qualitative study of proxy decision-making for research involving adults who lack capacity to consent in UK.“这是一个艰难的决定”:英国一项针对缺乏同意能力的成年人参与研究的代理决策的定性研究
Age Ageing. 2019 Nov 1;48(6):903-909. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afz115.
2
An exploration of physical activity experiences throughout the Huntington's disease journey: supporting development of theoretically underpinned complex interventions.探索亨廷顿舞蹈病病程中的身体活动体验:为有理论基础的复杂干预措施的发展提供支持。
Disabil Rehabil. 2021 Jun;43(11):1565-1575. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1671501. Epub 2019 Oct 7.
3
Seeing Beyond the Margins: Challenges to Informed Inclusion of Vulnerable Populations in Research.超越边缘:在研究中切实纳入弱势群体面临的挑战
J Law Med Ethics. 2018 Mar;46(1):30-43. doi: 10.1177/1073110518766006. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
4
Involving people with dementia in developing an interactive web tool for shared decision-making: experiences with a participatory design approach.让痴呆症患者参与开发互动式网络决策工具:参与式设计方法的经验。
Disabil Rehabil. 2018 Jun;40(12):1410-1420. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1298162. Epub 2017 Mar 12.
5
Changes in mental state and behaviour in Huntington's disease.亨廷顿舞蹈症患者精神状态和行为的变化
Lancet Psychiatry. 2016 Nov;3(11):1079-1086. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30144-4. Epub 2016 Sep 20.
6
Research involving adults lacking capacity to consent: the impact of research regulation on 'evidence biased' medicine.涉及无同意能力成年人的研究:研究监管对“证据有偏差”医学的影响。
BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Sep 8;17(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s12910-016-0138-9.
7
'You are just left to get on with it': qualitative study of patient and carer experiences of the transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.“你只能继续应对下去”:关于患者及照料者向继发进展型多发性硬化症转变经历的定性研究
BMJ Open. 2015 Jul 22;5(7):e007674. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007674.
8
"You plan, but you never know"--participation among people with different levels of severity of Parkinson's disease.“你做了计划,但世事难料”——帕金森病不同严重程度患者的参与情况
Disabil Rehabil. 2014;36(26):2216-24. doi: 10.3109/09638288.2014.898807. Epub 2014 Mar 27.
9
Effect of time of day on walking capacity and self-reported fatigue in persons with multiple sclerosis: a multi-center trial.时间对多发性硬化症患者行走能力和自我报告疲劳的影响:一项多中心试验。
Mult Scler. 2012 Mar;18(3):351-7. doi: 10.1177/1352458511419881. Epub 2011 Oct 3.
10
Empty ethics: the problem with informed consent.空洞的伦理:知情同意的问题
Sociol Health Illn. 2003 Nov;25(7):768-92. doi: 10.1046/j.1467-9566.2003.00369.x.