• 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

让资深利益相关者参与,以确定以患者为中心的肺癌筛查实施优化研究重点。

Engaging veteran stakeholders to identify patient-centred research priorities for optimizing implementation of lung cancer screening.

机构信息

Center for Advancing Population Science, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, USA.

Department of Family and Community Medicine, Center for Healthy Communities and Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, USA.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2022 Feb;25(1):408-418. doi: 10.1111/hex.13401. Epub 2021 Dec 10.

DOI:10.1111/hex.13401
PMID:34890474
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8849265/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in research agenda setting is increasingly being seen as a strategy to improve the responsiveness of healthcare to patient priorities. Implementation of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer is suboptimal, suggesting that research is needed.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe an approach by which a Veteran patient group worked with other stakeholders to develop a research agenda for LDCT screening and to describe the research questions that they prioritized.

METHODS

We worked with Veterans organizations to identify 12 Veterans or family members at risk for or having experience with lung cancer to form a Patient Advisory Council (PAC). The PAC met repeatedly from June 2018 to December 2020, both independently and jointly, with stakeholders representing clinicians, health administrators and researchers to identify relevant research topics. The PAC prioritized these topics and then identified questions within these areas where research was needed using an iterative process. Finally, they ranked the importance of obtaining answers to these questions.

RESULTS

PAC members valued the co-learning generated by interactions with stakeholders, but emphasized the importance of facilitation to avoid stakeholders dominating the discussion. The PAC prioritized three broad research areas-(1) the impact of insurance on uptake of LDCT; (2) how best to inform Veterans about LDCT; and (3) follow-up and impact of screening results. Using these areas as guides, PAC members identified 20 specific questions, ranking as most important (1) innovative outreach methods, (2) the impact of screening on psychological health, and (3) the impact of outsourcing scans from VA to non-VA providers on completion of recommended follow-up of screening results. The latter two were not identified as high priority by the stakeholder group.

CONCLUSIONS

We present an approach that facilitates co-learning between Veteran patients and providers, researchers and health system administrators to increase patient confidence in their ability to contribute important information to a research agenda. The research questions prioritized by the Veterans who participated in this project illustrate that for this new screening technology, patients are concerned about the practical details of implementation (e.g., follow-up) and the technology's impact on quality of life.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Veterans and Veteran advocates contributed to our research team throughout the entire research process, including conceiving and co-authoring this manuscript.

摘要

背景

越来越多的人认为,让患者参与研究议程的制定是提高医疗保健对患者需求的响应能力的一种策略。低剂量计算机断层扫描(LDCT)筛查肺癌的实施情况并不理想,这表明需要开展相关研究。

目的

本研究旨在描述退伍军人患者群体与其他利益相关者合作制定 LDCT 筛查研究议程的方法,并描述他们优先考虑的研究问题。

方法

我们与退伍军人组织合作,确定了 12 名有肺癌风险或有肺癌经历的退伍军人或家属组成患者顾问委员会(PAC)。该 PAC 从 2018 年 6 月至 2020 年 12 月期间,独立地和联合地与代表临床医生、医疗管理人员和研究人员的利益相关者多次会面,以确定相关的研究主题。PAC 对这些主题进行了优先排序,然后使用迭代过程确定在这些领域需要开展研究的问题。最后,他们对回答这些问题的重要性进行了排名。

结果

PAC 成员重视与利益相关者互动所产生的共同学习,但强调需要促进这种互动,以避免利益相关者主导讨论。PAC 确定了三个广泛的研究领域:(1)保险对 LDCT 采用率的影响;(2)如何最好地向退伍军人告知 LDCT;(3)筛查结果的随访和影响。PAC 成员使用这些领域作为指导,确定了 20 个具体问题,将以下问题列为最重要的问题:(1)创新的外展方法;(2)筛查对心理健康的影响;(3)将 VA 扫描外包给非 VA 提供者对完成推荐的筛查结果随访的影响。这后两个问题没有被利益相关者群体列为高优先级。

结论

我们提出了一种方法,该方法促进了退伍军人患者与提供者、研究人员和医疗系统管理人员之间的共同学习,增强了患者对自己为研究议程提供重要信息的能力的信心。参与本项目的退伍军人优先考虑的研究问题表明,对于这项新的筛查技术,患者关注的是实施的实际细节(例如,随访)和该技术对生活质量的影响。

患者或公众的贡献

退伍军人及其倡导者在整个研究过程中都为我们的研究团队做出了贡献,包括构思和共同撰写本文。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8a92/8849265/d98b28327be1/HEX-25-408-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8a92/8849265/397a980021bb/HEX-25-408-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8a92/8849265/d98b28327be1/HEX-25-408-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8a92/8849265/397a980021bb/HEX-25-408-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8a92/8849265/d98b28327be1/HEX-25-408-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Engaging veteran stakeholders to identify patient-centred research priorities for optimizing implementation of lung cancer screening.让资深利益相关者参与,以确定以患者为中心的肺癌筛查实施优化研究重点。
Health Expect. 2022 Feb;25(1):408-418. doi: 10.1111/hex.13401. Epub 2021 Dec 10.
2
Stakeholder Research Priorities to Promote Implementation of Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening: An American Thoracic Society and Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Statement.促进肺癌筛查共同决策实施的利益相关者研究重点:美国胸科学会和退伍军人事务部卫生服务研究与发展声明
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2022 Mar 15;205(6):619-630. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202201-0126ST.
3
A lung cancer research agenda that reflects the diverse perspectives of community stakeholders: process and outcomes of the SEED method.一项反映社区利益相关者不同观点的肺癌研究议程:SEED方法的过程与成果
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Jan 11;5:3. doi: 10.1186/s40900-018-0134-y. eCollection 2019.
4
Co-designing person-centred quality indicator implementation for primary care in Alberta: a consensus study.共同设计艾伯塔省初级保健中以患者为中心的质量指标实施方案:一项共识研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Nov 8;8(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00397-z.
5
Stakeholder Research Priorities for Smoking Cessation Interventions within Lung Cancer Screening Programs. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.肺癌筛查项目中戒烟干预措施的利益相关者研究重点。美国胸科学会官方研究声明。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017 Nov 1;196(9):1202-1212. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201709-1858ST.
6
Enhancing Veteran Community Reintegration Research (ENCORE): Protocol for a Mixed Methods and Stakeholder Engagement Project.增强退伍军人社区重新融入研究(ENCORE):混合方法与利益相关者参与项目方案
JMIR Res Protoc. 2023 Mar 14;12:e42029. doi: 10.2196/42029.
7
Veteran Engagement in Health Services Research: a Conceptual Model.老兵参与健康服务研究:概念模型。
J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Apr;37(Suppl 1):94-98. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-07309-z. Epub 2022 Mar 29.
8
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.
9
Primary Care Provider and Patient Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening. A Qualitative Study.初级保健提供者和患者对肺癌筛查的看法。定性研究。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016 Nov;13(11):1977-1982. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201604-286OC.
10
Organizational Readiness for Lung Cancer Screening: A Cross-Sectional Evaluation at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.肺癌筛查的组织准备:退伍军人事务医疗中心的横断面评估。
J Am Coll Radiol. 2021 Jun;18(6):809-819. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2020.12.010. Epub 2021 Jan 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Self-blaming as a barrier to lung cancer screening and smoking cessation programs in Italy. A qualitative study.自责作为意大利肺癌筛查和戒烟项目的障碍:一项定性研究。
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 5;20(3):e0318732. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0318732. eCollection 2025.
2
Lifetime prevalence and correlates of colorectal cancer screening among low-income U.S. Veterans.美国低收入退伍军人一生中结直肠癌筛查的流行率及相关因素。
Cancer Causes Control. 2024 Sep;35(9):1215-1231. doi: 10.1007/s10552-024-01881-5. Epub 2024 May 7.
3
Patient and public involvement in cancer research: A scoping review.

本文引用的文献

1
Screening for Lung Cancer With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.用低剂量计算机断层扫描进行肺癌筛查:美国预防服务工作组的更新证据报告和系统评价。
JAMA. 2021 Mar 9;325(10):971-987. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.0377.
2
Coronavirus disease 2019 in veterans receiving care at veterans health administration facilities.退伍军人事务部医疗设施中接受治疗的退伍军人中的 2019 年冠状病毒病。
Ann Epidemiol. 2021 Mar;55:10-14. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2020.12.003. Epub 2020 Dec 16.
3
Addressing Disparities in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility and Healthcare Access. An Official American Thoracic Society Statement.
患者和公众参与癌症研究:范围综述。
Cancer Med. 2023 Jul;12(14):15530-15543. doi: 10.1002/cam4.6200. Epub 2023 Jun 16.
解决肺癌筛查资格和医疗保健获取方面的差异。美国胸科学会官方声明。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Oct 1;202(7):e95-e112. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202008-3053ST.
4
Priorities of patients, caregivers and health-care professionals for health research - A systematic review.患者、护理人员和医疗保健专业人员的健康研究优先事项 - 系统评价。
Health Expect. 2020 Oct;23(5):992-1006. doi: 10.1111/hex.13090. Epub 2020 Jul 9.
5
Research priority setting in women's health: a systematic review.妇女健康研究重点制定:系统评价。
BJOG. 2020 May;127(6):694-700. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16150. Epub 2020 Apr 6.
6
Engaging young African American women breast cancer survivors: A novel storytelling approach to identify patient-centred research priorities.让非裔美国年轻女性乳腺癌幸存者参与进来:一种新颖的叙事方法,用于确定以患者为中心的研究重点。
Health Expect. 2020 Apr;23(2):473-482. doi: 10.1111/hex.13021. Epub 2020 Jan 9.
7
Lessons Learned to Promote Lung Cancer Screening and Preempt Worsening Lung Cancer Disparities.为促进肺癌筛查及避免肺癌差异加剧所吸取的经验教训。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Apr 15;201(8):892-893. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201912-2398ED.
8
Reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE).健康研究优先排序报告指南(REPRISE)。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Dec 28;19(1):243. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0889-3.
9
Selecting, refining and identifying priority Cochrane Reviews in health communication and participation in partnership with consumers and other stakeholders.选择、精炼和确定与消费者及其他利益攸关方合作的健康传播领域中的优先 Cochrane 综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Apr 29;17(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0444-z.
10
Patient and Public Engagement in Integrated Knowledge Translation Research: Are we there yet?患者及公众参与整合知识转化研究:我们做到了吗?
Res Involv Engagem. 2019 Feb 12;5:8. doi: 10.1186/s40900-019-0139-1. eCollection 2019.