• 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

加拿大魁北克省CHUS研究中心的患者-伴侣参与情况:从直观方法到实施三年后的推广。

Patient-partner engagement at the Centre de recherche du CHUS in the Province of Québec, Canada: from an intuitive methodology to outreach after three years of implementation.

作者信息

Boutin Denis, Mastine Susan C, Beaubien Luc, Berthiaume Maryse, Boilard Denise, Borja Jaime, Botton Edouard, Boulianne-Gref Janie, Breton Sylvie, Castellano Christian-Alexandre, Charpentier Gisèle, Counil Francois-Pierre, Cozmano Marie-Josée, Dagenais Pierre, Drouin Guy, Fortier Marie-Josée, Francoeur Caroline, Gagné Louise, Héraud David, Hêtu Denise, Houde Marie-Pier, Ladouceur Ginette, Landry Marjolaine, Leblanc Elisabeth, Loignon Christine, Lussier Valéry, Morin Annie, Ouellet Nathalie, Quintin Claude, Ramnarine Avinash, Wilhelmy Catherine, Svotelis Amy, Thibault Marie-Ève, Fraser William D, Battista Marie-Claude

机构信息

Centre de recherche du CHUS, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada.

Direction de la coordination de la mission universitaire, Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et des Services Sociaux de l'Estrie - Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Mar 16;7(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00258-1.

DOI:10.1186/s40900-021-00258-1
PMID:33726817
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7962081/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Medical societies and funding agencies strongly recommend that patients be included as partners in research publications and grant applications. Although this "top-down" approach is certainly efficient at forcing this new and desirable type of collaboration, our past experience demonstrated that it often results in an ambiguous relationship as not yet well integrated into the cultures of either patients' or the researchers'. The question our group raised from this observation was: "How to generate a cultural shift toward a fruitful and long-lasting collaboration between patients and researchers? A "bottom-up" approach was key to our stakeholders. The overall objective was to build a trusting and bidirectional-ecosystem between patients and researchers. The specific objectives were to document: 1) the steps that led to the development of the first patient-partner strategic committee within a research center in the Province of Québec; 2) the committee's achievements after 3 years.

METHODS

Eighteen volunteer members, 12 patient-partners and 6 clinician/institutional representatives, were invited to represent the six research themes of the Centre de recherche du CHU de Sherbrooke (CRCHUS) (Quebec, Canada). Information on the services offered by Committee was disseminated internally and to external partners. Committee members satisfaction was evaluated.

RESULTS

From May 2017 to April 2020, members attended 29 scheduled and 6 ad hoc meetings and contributed to activities requiring over 1000 h of volunteer time in 2018-2019 and 1907 h in the 2019-2020 period. The Committee's implication spanned governance, expertise, and knowledge transfer in research. Participation in these activities increased annually at local, provincial, national and international levels. The Patient-Partner Committee collaborated with various local (n = 7), provincial (n = 6) and national (n = 4) partners. Member satisfaction with the Committee's mandate and format was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The CRCHUS co-constructed a Patient-Partner Strategic Committee which resulted in meaningful bilateral, trusting and fruitful collaborations between patients, researchers and partners. The "bottom-up" approach - envisioned and implemented by the Committee, where the expertise and the needs of patients complemented those of researchers, foundations, networks and decision-makers - is key to the success of a cultural shift. The CRCHUS Committee created a hub to develop the relevant intrinsic potential aimed at changing the socio-cultural environment of science.

摘要

背景

医学协会和资助机构强烈建议让患者作为合作伙伴参与研究出版物和资助申请。尽管这种“自上而下”的方法在推动这种新型且理想的合作方面肯定是有效的,但我们过去的经验表明,它往往会导致一种模糊的关系,因为这种合作尚未很好地融入患者或研究人员的文化之中。我们团队基于这一观察提出的问题是:“如何实现文化转变,以促成患者与研究人员之间富有成效且持久的合作?” 一种“自下而上”的方法对我们的利益相关者来说至关重要。总体目标是在患者和研究人员之间建立一个相互信任的双向生态系统。具体目标是记录:1)导致魁北克省一个研究中心内首个患者伙伴战略委员会成立的步骤;2)该委员会在3年后取得的成果。

方法

邀请了18名志愿者成员,其中12名是患者伙伴,6名是临床医生/机构代表,以代表加拿大魁北克省舍布鲁克大学医学研究中心(CRCHUS)的六个研究主题。委员会提供的服务信息在内部以及向外部合作伙伴进行了传播。对委员会成员的满意度进行了评估。

结果

从2017年5月到2020年4月,成员们参加了29次定期会议和6次特别会议,并在2018 - 2019年贡献了超过1000小时的志愿时间,在2019 - 2020年期间贡献了1907小时。委员会的参与涵盖了研究中的治理、专业知识和知识转移。在地方、省级、国家级和国际层面,参与这些活动的人数逐年增加。患者伙伴委员会与各种地方(n = 7)、省级(n = 6)和国家级(n = 4)合作伙伴进行了合作。成员对委员会的任务和形式的满意度为100%。

结论

CRCHUS共同构建了一个患者伙伴战略委员会,促成了患者、研究人员和合作伙伴之间有意义的双边、相互信任且富有成效的合作。委员会设想并实施的“自下而上”方法,即患者的专业知识和需求与研究人员、基金会、网络及决策者的专业知识和需求相辅相成,是文化转变成功的关键。CRCHUS委员会创建了一个中心,以挖掘相关的内在潜力,旨在改变科学的社会文化环境。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9fd9/7968251/5bae025e312d/40900_2021_258_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9fd9/7968251/6e9eb24f2408/40900_2021_258_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9fd9/7968251/5bae025e312d/40900_2021_258_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9fd9/7968251/6e9eb24f2408/40900_2021_258_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9fd9/7968251/5bae025e312d/40900_2021_258_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Patient-partner engagement at the Centre de recherche du CHUS in the Province of Québec, Canada: from an intuitive methodology to outreach after three years of implementation.加拿大魁北克省CHUS研究中心的患者-伴侣参与情况:从直观方法到实施三年后的推广。
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Mar 16;7(1):15. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00258-1.
2
Re-Envisioning the Canadian Nephrology Trials Network: A Can-SOLVE-CKD Stakeholder Meeting of Patient Partners and Researchers.重新构想加拿大肾脏病试验网络:患者合作伙伴与研究人员的加拿大慢性肾脏病解决方案(Can-SOLVE-CKD)利益相关者会议
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2021 Jul 14;8:20543581211030396. doi: 10.1177/20543581211030396. eCollection 2021.
3
Public Interest Group on Cancer Research: a successful patient-researcher partnership in Newfoundland and Labrador.癌症研究公共利益组织:纽芬兰与拉布拉多省成功的患者-研究人员合作关系。
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Sep 3;8(1):46. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00380-8.
4
Patient Engagement Partnerships in Clinical Trials: Development of Patient Partner and Investigator Decision Aids.临床试验中的患者参与伙伴关系:患者伙伴和研究者决策辅助工具的开发。
Patient. 2020 Dec;13(6):745-756. doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00460-5. Epub 2020 Oct 7.
5
Patient involvement in cardiovascular research: a qualitative impact evaluation.患者参与心血管研究:一项定性影响评估。
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Oct 14;5:29. doi: 10.1186/s40900-019-0165-z. eCollection 2019.
6
Lessons learned in measuring patient engagement in a Canada-wide childhood disability network.在加拿大全国性儿童残疾网络中衡量患者参与度所汲取的经验教训。
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Feb 7;10(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00551-9.
7
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.
8
Critical Care Network in the State of Qatar.卡塔尔国重症监护网络。
Qatar Med J. 2019 Nov 7;2019(2):2. doi: 10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.2. eCollection 2019.
9
Patient and researcher experiences of patient engagement in primary care health care research: A participatory qualitative study.患者和研究人员对初级保健医疗研究中患者参与的体验:一项参与式定性研究。
Health Expect. 2022 Oct;25(5):2365-2376. doi: 10.1111/hex.13542. Epub 2022 Jul 22.
10
Evaluation of an integrated knowledge translation approach used for updating the Cochrane Review of Patient Decision Aids: a pre-post mixed methods study.用于更新《Cochrane患者决策辅助工具综述》的综合知识转化方法的评估:一项前后对比的混合方法研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Feb 9;10(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00550-w.

引用本文的文献

1
How to mobilise users' experiential knowledge in the evaluation of advanced technologies and practices in Quebec? The example of the permanent users' and relatives' panel.如何在魁北克的先进技术和实践评估中调动用户的经验知识?常设用户和亲属小组的例子。
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13964. doi: 10.1111/hex.13964.
2
Patient engagement in a Canadian health research funding institute: implementation and impact.患者参与加拿大健康研究资助机构:实施情况和影响。
BMJ Open. 2024 Jul 8;14(7):e082502. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-082502.
3
Patient engagement in health implementation research: A logic model.

本文引用的文献

1
Exploring the Relationship (and Power Dynamic) Between Researchers and Public Partners Working Together in Applied Health Research Teams.探索应用健康研究团队中研究人员与公共合作伙伴之间的关系(以及权力动态)。
Front Sociol. 2019 Mar 29;4:20. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2019.00020. eCollection 2019.
2
The Role of Patient Advisory Councils in Health Research: Lessons From Two Provincial Councils in Canada.患者咨询委员会在健康研究中的作用:来自加拿大两个省级委员会的经验教训。
J Patient Exp. 2020 Dec;7(6):898-905. doi: 10.1177/2374373520909598. Epub 2020 Mar 23.
3
A Framework to Ensure Patient Partners Have Equal and Contributing Voices Throughout the Research Program Evaluation Process.
患者参与健康实施研究:逻辑模型。
Health Expect. 2023 Oct;26(5):1854-1862. doi: 10.1111/hex.13782. Epub 2023 Jun 12.
4
The experience of patient partners in research: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.患者伙伴参与研究的经历:一项定性系统评价与主题综合分析
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Oct 3;8(1):55. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00388-0.
一个确保患者合作伙伴在整个研究项目评估过程中拥有平等且具建设性声音的框架。
Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2020 Nov 26;7:2054358120970093. doi: 10.1177/2054358120970093. eCollection 2020.
4
Patients as Partners in Research: How to Talk About Compensation With Patient Partners.患者作为研究的伙伴:如何与患者伙伴谈论补偿。
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2020 Aug;50(8):413-414. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2020.0106.
5
Partnering with patients in healthcare research: a scoping review of ethical issues, challenges, and recommendations for practice.与患者合作参与医疗保健研究:伦理问题、挑战及实践建议的范围综述。
BMC Med Ethics. 2020 May 11;21(1):34. doi: 10.1186/s12910-020-0460-0.
6
Patients as Partners in Research: There Is Plenty of Help for Researchers.患者作为研究的合作伙伴:研究人员有很多帮助。
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2020 May;50(5):219-221. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2020.0104.
7
Innovating public engagement and patient involvement through strategic collaboration and practice.通过战略合作与实践创新公众参与和患者参与。
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Oct 21;5:30. doi: 10.1186/s40900-019-0160-4. eCollection 2019.
8
Evaluating the "return on patient engagement initiatives" in medicines research and development: A literature review.评估药品研发中“患者参与举措的回报”:文献综述。
Health Expect. 2020 Feb;23(1):5-18. doi: 10.1111/hex.12951. Epub 2019 Sep 6.
9
How Payment for Research Participation Can Be Coercive.研究参与付费可能具有强制性。
Am J Bioeth. 2019 Sep;19(9):21-31. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2019.1630497.
10
Understanding the motivations of patients: A co-designed project to understand the factors behind patient engagement.了解患者的动机:一个共同设计的项目,旨在了解患者参与背后的因素。
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):709-720. doi: 10.1111/hex.12942. Epub 2019 Aug 4.