Vat Lidewij Eva, Finlay Teresa, Robinson Paul, Barbareschi Giorgio, Boudes Mathieu, Diaz Ponce Ana Maria, Dinboeck Michaela, Eichmann Lukas, Ferrer Elisa, Fruytier Sevgi E, Hey Claudia, Broerse Jacqueline E W, Schuitmaker-Warnaar Tjerk Jan
Athena Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Health Expect. 2021 Apr;24(2):491-506. doi: 10.1111/hex.13191. Epub 2021 Feb 24.
Patient engagement is becoming more customary in medicine development. However, embedding it in organizational decision-making remains challenging, partly due to lack of agreement on its value and the means to evaluate it. The objective of this project was to develop a monitoring and evaluation framework, with metrics, to demonstrate impact and enhance learning.
A consortium of five patient groups, 15 biopharmaceutical companies and two academic groups iteratively created a framework in a multi-phase participatory process, including analysis of its application in 24 cases.
The framework includes six components, with 87 metrics and 15 context factors distributed among (sub)components: (a) Input: expectations, preparations, resources, representativeness of stakeholders; (b) Activities/process: structure, management, interactions, satisfaction; (c) Learnings and changes; (d) Impacts: research relevance, study ethics and inclusiveness, study quality and efficiency, quality of evidence and uptake of products, empowerment, reputation and trust, embedding of patient engagement; (e) Context: policy, institutional, community, decision-making contextual factors. Case study findings show a wide variation in use of metrics. There is no 'one size fits all' set of metrics appropriate for every initiative or organization. Presented sample sets of metrics can be tailored to individual situations.
Introducing change into any process is best done when the value of that change is clear. This framework allows participants to select what metrics they value and assess to what extent patient engagement has contributed.
Five patient groups were involved in all phases of the study (design, conduct, interpretation of data) and in writing the manuscript.
患者参与在医学研发中越来越常见。然而,将其纳入组织决策仍具有挑战性,部分原因是对其价值和评估方法缺乏共识。本项目的目标是开发一个带有指标的监测和评估框架,以证明其影响并促进学习。
由五个患者群体、15家生物制药公司和两个学术团体组成的联盟在一个多阶段参与过程中反复创建了一个框架,包括分析其在24个案例中的应用。
该框架包括六个组成部分,有87个指标和15个背景因素分布在各(子)组成部分中:(a)投入:期望、准备工作、资源、利益相关者的代表性;(b)活动/过程:结构、管理、互动、满意度;(c)学习与变化;(d)影响:研究相关性、研究伦理与包容性、研究质量与效率、证据质量与产品采用情况、赋权、声誉与信任、患者参与的融入;(e)背景:政策、机构、社区、决策背景因素。案例研究结果表明指标的使用差异很大。没有一套适用于每个倡议或组织的“一刀切”指标。所展示的指标样本集可根据具体情况进行调整。
当变革的价值明确时,将其引入任何过程都是最好的做法。该框架允许参与者选择他们重视的指标,并评估患者参与在多大程度上做出了贡献。
五个患者群体参与了研究的所有阶段(设计、实施、数据解读)以及撰写手稿。