TRS National Resource Centre for Rare Disorders, Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital, 1450 Nesoddtangen, Nesodden, Oslo, Norway.
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2022 May 31;17(1):212. doi: 10.1186/s13023-022-02357-y.
Patients' involvement (PI) in research is recognized as a valuable strategy for increasing the quality, developing more targeted research and to speed up more innovative research dissemination. Nevertheless, patient involvement in rare diseases research (PI-RDR) is scarce. The aims were: To study the Norwegian researchers` experiences and perceptions of PI-RDR and review the literature on PI-RDR.
In the scoping review 608 articles read in full-text and 13 articles (one review and twelve primary studies) were included. The heterogeneity of the design, methodology and results was large. Most studies described several benefits of PI, but few described methods for measuring impacts and effectiveness of PI-RDR. In the cross sectional part of this study, 145 of 251 employees working in the nine Norwegian Centers on Rare Diseases participated, of these 69 were researchers. Most (95%) of the researchers claimed that rare diseases research is more challenging than for the more common diseases. The majority (95%) argued that PI-RDR may increase the quality of the studies and the relevance, and most (89%) agreed that PI-RDR in dissemination may increase the awareness and public interest for rare diseases. In the open-ended questions several researchers also claimed challenges related to PI-RDR, and many had proposal for improving PI and promotion of rare disease research.
Both the literature and researchers emphasized that PI-RDR is important for improving research quality and increase the public attention on rare diseases, but what constitutes effective PI-RDR still remain unclear. More research on the design, methodology and assessment for measuring the impact of PI-RDR is warranted.
患者参与(PI)在研究中被认为是提高质量、开发更有针对性的研究和加速更具创新性的研究传播的有价值的策略。然而,患者在罕见病研究(PI-RDR)中的参与很少。目的是:研究挪威研究人员对 PI-RDR 的经验和看法,并回顾 PI-RDR 的文献。
在范围综述中,全文阅读了 608 篇文章,纳入了 13 篇文章(一篇综述和十二篇原始研究)。设计、方法和结果的异质性很大。大多数研究描述了 PI 的几个好处,但很少描述衡量 PI-RDR 的影响和有效性的方法。在这项研究的横断面部分,251 名在九个挪威罕见病中心工作的员工中有 145 人参与,其中 69 人是研究人员。大多数(95%)研究人员认为罕见病研究比常见疾病更具挑战性。大多数(95%)人认为 PI-RDR 可以提高研究质量和相关性,大多数(89%)人认为在传播中 PI-RDR 可以提高对罕见病的认识和公众兴趣。在开放式问题中,几位研究人员还声称 PI-RDR 存在挑战,许多人对改进 PI 和促进罕见病研究提出了建议。
文献和研究人员都强调 PI-RDR 对于提高研究质量和增加公众对罕见病的关注非常重要,但什么构成有效的 PI-RDR 仍然不清楚。需要更多关于设计、方法和评估的研究,以衡量 PI-RDR 的影响。