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

6
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.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

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