Suppr超能文献

患者和公众参与养老院研究:关于如何以及为何让患者和公众参与合作伙伴参与定性数据分析和解释的思考。

Patient and public involvement in care home research: Reflections on the how and why of involving patient and public involvement partners in qualitative data analysis and interpretation.

机构信息

Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

School of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2021 Aug;24(4):1349-1356. doi: 10.1111/hex.13269. Epub 2021 May 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence for the impact of involving patients and the public (PPI) in health research. Descriptions of the PPI process are seldom included in publications, particularly data analysis, yet an understanding of processes and impacts of PPI is essential if its contribution to research is to be evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the 'how' of PPI in qualitative data analysis and critically reflect on potential impact.

METHODS

We focus on the development and critical reflection of our step-by-step approach to collaborative qualitative data analysis (through a series of analysis workshops) in a specific care home study, and our long-term engagement model with patients and the public (termed PPI partners).

RESULTS

An open access PPI group, with multiple events over time, sustained broad interest in care home research. Recordings of interview clips, role-play of interview excerpts and written theme summaries were used in workshops to facilitate PPI partner engagement with data analysis in a specific study. PPI resulted in changes to data interpretation and was perceived to make the research process accessible. We reflect on the challenge of judging the benefits of PPI and presenting PPI in research publications for critical commentary.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and public involvement partners who are actively engaged with data analysis can positively influence research studies. However, guidance for researchers is needed on approaches to PPI, including appropriate levels and methods for evaluation. Without more systematic approaches, we argue that it is impossible to know whether PPI represents good use of resources and is generating a real impact.

摘要

背景

目前关于患者和公众参与(PPI)对健康研究影响的证据有限。发表的研究很少描述 PPI 过程,特别是数据分析,但如果要评估 PPI 对研究的贡献,就必须了解其过程和影响。

目的

描述 PPI 在定性数据分析中的“如何”进行,并批判性地反思其潜在影响。

方法

我们专注于在一个特定的养老院研究中,对合作定性数据分析(通过一系列分析研讨会)的逐步方法的发展和批判性反思,以及我们与患者和公众(称为 PPI 合作伙伴)的长期参与模式。

结果

一个开放获取的 PPI 小组,随着时间的推移,举办了多次活动,对养老院研究保持着广泛的兴趣。在研讨会上使用访谈剪辑录音、访谈摘录角色扮演和书面主题总结,以促进 PPI 合作伙伴参与特定研究的数据分析。PPI 导致了对数据解释的改变,并被认为使研究过程易于理解。我们反思了判断 PPI 益处和在研究出版物中呈现 PPI 以进行批判性评论的挑战。

结论

积极参与数据分析的患者和公众参与合作伙伴可以对研究产生积极影响。但是,需要为研究人员提供有关 PPI 方法的指导,包括适当的评估水平和方法。如果没有更系统的方法,我们认为就不可能知道 PPI 是否代表了资源的合理利用,并产生了真正的影响。

相似文献

3
Reflections on qualitative data analysis training for PPI partners and its implementation into practice.
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Aug 14;5:22. doi: 10.1186/s40900-019-0156-0. eCollection 2019.
6
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
7
Patients as research partners in preference studies: learnings from IMI-PREFER.
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Apr 7;9(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00430-9.
8
Patient and public involvement in doctoral research: Impact, resources and recommendations.
Health Expect. 2020 Feb;23(1):125-136. doi: 10.1111/hex.12976. Epub 2019 Oct 15.
9
Patient and public involvement in dementia research in the European Union: a scoping review.
BMC Geriatr. 2019 Aug 14;19(1):220. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1217-9.

引用本文的文献

7
Reflecting on the Spectrum of Involvement: How do we involve patients as partners in education?
Med Educ. 2025 Feb;59(2):198-209. doi: 10.1111/medu.15484. Epub 2024 Aug 6.
8
Activity provider-facilitated patient and public involvement with care home residents.
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Jan 11;10(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00537-z.
10

本文引用的文献

1
Embedding patient and public involvement: Managing tacit and explicit expectations.
Health Expect. 2019 Dec;22(6):1231-1239. doi: 10.1111/hex.12952. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
2
Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: Systematic review and co-design pilot.
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):785-801. doi: 10.1111/hex.12888. Epub 2019 Apr 22.
3
Development of the ACTIVE framework to describe stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2019 Oct;24(4):245-255. doi: 10.1177/1355819619841647. Epub 2019 Apr 18.
4
Involving service users in the qualitative analysis of patient narratives to support healthcare quality improvement.
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Jan 3;5:1. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0133-z. eCollection 2019.
5
Public involvement in health and social sciences research: A concept analysis.
Health Expect. 2018 Dec;21(6):1183-1190. doi: 10.1111/hex.12825. Epub 2018 Aug 29.
7
Patient and public engagement in research and health system decision making: A systematic review of evaluation tools.
Health Expect. 2018 Dec;21(6):1075-1084. doi: 10.1111/hex.12804. Epub 2018 Jul 30.
10
Lay involvement in the analysis of qualitative data in health services research: a descriptive study.
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Aug 20;2:29. doi: 10.1186/s40900-016-0041-z. eCollection 2016.

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