Gilchrist Katie, Iqbal Syka, Vindrola-Padros Cecilia
Department of Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, UK.
Department of Psychology, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Nov 30;8(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00402-5.
Rapid qualitative studies conducted with patient and public involvement can help promote policy-relevant and efficient research. There is a need to understand the experiences of researchers, patients, and members of the public to guide the development of good practice and to determine the extent to which rapid qualitative research can be implemented in PPIE projects.
We conducted a qualitative study to explore the experiences of research teams that carried out studies using rapid techniques with patient and public involvement. We carried out 26 interviews with researchers, coordinators, patients, carers, service users and members of the public.
This study identified needs which related to practical and time constraints. Rapid qualitative research tends to be limited to certain PPIE groups, and particular phases of the research process. Study findings are rarely discussed with PPIE members. The educational needs of rapid qualitative research were also identified. Researchers and PPIE members considered three main issues: a lack of training on patient involvement for researchers, rapid qualitative research training for PPIE members, and the diversity of PPIE members.
We found that rapid researchers were able to involve patients and members of the public in research despite time pressures. The challenges identified in this study can be used to plan future training programmes for researchers and PPIE panel members and develop strategies to recruit PPIE panel members from a wide range of backgrounds.
The research aim was to explore the experiences of those carrying out rapid qualitative studies with PPIE. As such, the participants of this study included patients, carers, service users and members of the public, who were interviewed individually. A lived experienced researcher and PPIE member for a hospital conducted the design, data collection and analysis of the study. The study brief was to interview researchers only. The lived-experience researcher initiated the inclusion of PPIE members as participants, therefore strengthening the study design. We shared the draft report with the PPIE participants for participant validation and to maintain a continuous feedback relationship. This led to addressing key issues in designing and involving PPIE members in more meaningful and equal ways. Whilst there is agreement on activities which centre on PPIE, there is no consensus on how to achieve these in high quality rapid qualitative studies.
通过患者和公众参与开展的快速定性研究有助于推动与政策相关且高效的研究。有必要了解研究人员、患者和公众的经历,以指导良好实践的发展,并确定快速定性研究在患者和公众参与的研究、影响与评价(PPIE)项目中能够实施的程度。
我们开展了一项定性研究,以探索那些在患者和公众参与的情况下使用快速技术进行研究的团队的经历。我们对研究人员、协调员、患者、护理人员、服务使用者和公众进行了26次访谈。
本研究确定了与实际和时间限制相关的需求。快速定性研究往往局限于某些PPIE群体以及研究过程的特定阶段。研究结果很少与PPIE成员进行讨论。还确定了快速定性研究的教育需求。研究人员和PPIE成员考虑了三个主要问题:研究人员缺乏患者参与方面的培训、PPIE成员的快速定性研究培训以及PPIE成员的多样性。
我们发现,尽管存在时间压力,但快速研究人员能够让患者和公众参与研究。本研究中确定的挑战可用于为研究人员和PPIE小组成员规划未来的培训计划,并制定从广泛背景招募PPIE小组成员的策略。
该研究的目的是探索那些开展有PPIE的快速定性研究的人员的经历。因此,本研究的参与者包括患者、护理人员、服务使用者和公众,他们分别接受了访谈。一位有实际经验的医院研究人员兼PPIE成员进行了该研究的设计、数据收集和分析。研究简报原本只采访研究人员。这位有实际经验的研究人员发起将PPIE成员纳入参与者,从而加强了研究设计。我们与PPIE参与者分享了报告草稿,以进行参与者验证并保持持续的反馈关系。这导致以更有意义和平等的方式解决了设计和让PPIE成员参与的关键问题。虽然对于以PPIE为中心的活动达成了共识,但对于如何在高质量的快速定性研究中实现这些活动却没有达成共识。