• 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

参与式德国转化痴呆症护理研究网络(TaNDem)的设计与实施:一项关于痴呆症护理研究中医疗保健提供者和痴呆症研究人员观点的混合方法研究。

Design and implementation of the participatory German network for translational dementia care research (TaNDem): A mixed-method study on the perspectives of healthcare providers and dementia researchers in dementia care research.

机构信息

Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Rostock/Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Deutsches Zentrum für Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen (DZNE), Witten, Germany.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2023 Jun;26(3):1009-1018. doi: 10.1111/hex.13748. Epub 2023 Mar 12.

DOI:10.1111/hex.13748
PMID:36908005
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10154806/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is a lack of interaction between research and healthcare practice. As a result, research findings reach healthcare practice only late, and topics relevant to practice are often not known in research. Involving people living with dementia (PlwD), their relatives and healthcare providers in dementia care research can accelerate this process. For inclusion, firm and reliable structures are needed, which are to be established with the help of the Translational Network for Dementia Care Research in Germany. However, there is only limited knowledge about the priorities, expectations and conditions of stakeholders (healthcare providers and dementia researchers) for such cooperation within a network.

OBJECTIVES

The aim is to gather stakeholders' views on (i) future research topics to be addressed within the dementia care research network, (ii) the nature of collaboration within the network and (iii) the facilitating and hindering factors for establishing such a network.

METHODS

Within an exploratory sequential mixed-method study, we interviewed 87 stakeholders within eleven semistructured focus group interviews. The interviews were transcribed, pseudonymized and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The qualitative data were analyzed with MAXQDA. Based on the qualitative results found in the focus group interviews, a supplementary online questionnaire was developed to prioritise and rank these findings afterwards.

RESULTS

Stakeholders prioritized a comprehensible transfer of research results into practice, increased involvement of PlwD and their relatives (additionally marginalized groups such as people with a migrant background) in research and exchange between researchers. Cooperation should preferably occur in a regional context with local contacts, and the latest research results should be made available via an online database. The stakeholders' time, finances and human resources should be considered.

CONCLUSION

Stakeholders have partly similar preferences and goals for cooperation and involvement, emphasizing that such interaction in a network offers the possibility of long-term, effective collaboration and added value for practice and research.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

For this study, dementia healthcare providers and dementia care researchers were asked about their perspectives. Their involvement is further elucidated in the manuscript text.

摘要

背景

目前,研究与医疗保健实践之间缺乏互动。结果,研究结果很晚才到达医疗保健实践,而研究中通常不知道与实践相关的主题。让痴呆症患者(PlwD)、他们的亲属和医疗保健提供者参与痴呆症护理研究可以加速这一过程。为了实现这一目标,需要建立坚定可靠的结构,这将在德国痴呆症护理研究转化网络的帮助下建立。然而,对于网络内这种合作的利益相关者(医疗保健提供者和痴呆症研究人员)的优先事项、期望和条件,我们的了解是有限的。

目的

本研究旨在收集利益相关者对(i)在痴呆症护理研究网络内要解决的未来研究主题、(ii)网络内合作的性质以及(iii)建立此类网络的促进和阻碍因素的看法。

方法

在一项探索性顺序混合方法研究中,我们在 11 次半结构式焦点小组访谈中采访了 87 名利益相关者。访谈内容被转录、匿名并使用定性内容分析进行分析。使用 MAXQDA 对定性数据进行分析。根据焦点小组访谈中发现的定性结果,开发了一份补充在线问卷,以优先排序和评估这些发现。

结果

利益相关者优先考虑将研究结果更易于理解地转化为实践,增加 PlwD 及其亲属(以及边缘化群体,如具有移民背景的人)的参与,并促进研究人员之间的交流。合作最好在具有地方联系的区域背景下进行,最新的研究结果应通过在线数据库提供。应考虑利益相关者的时间、财务和人力资源。

结论

利益相关者在合作和参与方面有部分相似的偏好和目标,强调网络中的这种互动为实践和研究提供了长期、有效的合作和附加值的可能性。

患者或公众贡献

在这项研究中,痴呆症医疗保健提供者和痴呆症护理研究人员被要求提供他们的观点。他们的参与在本文案中进一步阐述。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6c0/10154806/14f4a4ba3a61/HEX-26--g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6c0/10154806/14f4a4ba3a61/HEX-26--g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f6c0/10154806/14f4a4ba3a61/HEX-26--g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Design and implementation of the participatory German network for translational dementia care research (TaNDem): A mixed-method study on the perspectives of healthcare providers and dementia researchers in dementia care research.参与式德国转化痴呆症护理研究网络(TaNDem)的设计与实施:一项关于痴呆症护理研究中医疗保健提供者和痴呆症研究人员观点的混合方法研究。
Health Expect. 2023 Jun;26(3):1009-1018. doi: 10.1111/hex.13748. Epub 2023 Mar 12.
2
Exploring stakeholders' perspectives on the adaptation of the Living Lab approach to dementia care: A qualitative study.探索利益相关者对将生活实验室方法应用于痴呆症护理的看法:一项定性研究。
Geriatr Nurs. 2023 Nov-Dec;54:184-191. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2023.09.008. Epub 2023 Oct 3.
3
Participatory development of a framework to actively involve people living with dementia and those from their social network, and healthcare professionals in conducting a systematic review: the DECIDE-SR protocol.参与式制定一个框架,以积极让痴呆症患者及其社交网络中的人员以及医疗保健专业人员参与进行系统评价:DECIDE-SR 方案。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Jul 11;9(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00461-2.
4
Stakeholder involvement in dementia research: A qualitative approach with healthy senior citizens and providers of dementia care in Germany.利益相关者参与痴呆症研究:德国健康老年人和痴呆症护理提供者的定性方法。
Health Soc Care Community. 2022 May;30(3):908-917. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13238. Epub 2020 Dec 23.
5
Healthcare organisation and delivery for people with dementia and comorbidity: a qualitative study exploring the views of patients, carers and professionals.针对患有痴呆症和合并症患者的医疗保健组织与服务提供:一项探索患者、护理人员和专业人员观点的定性研究
BMJ Open. 2017 Jan 18;7(1):e013067. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013067.
6
Engagement with a diverse Stakeholder Advisory Council for research in dementia care.与一个多元化的利益相关者咨询委员会合作开展痴呆症护理研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Jul 23;7(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00297-8.
7
Multiple stakeholders' perspectives on patient and public involvement in community mental health services research: A qualitative analysis.多利益相关者对社区心理健康服务研究中患者和公众参与的观点:定性分析。
Health Expect. 2022 Aug;25(4):1844-1860. doi: 10.1111/hex.13529. Epub 2022 Jun 3.
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
Elicitation of quantitative, choice-based preferences for Person-Centered Care among People living with Dementia in comparison to physicians' judgements in Germany: study protocol for the mixed-methods PreDemCare-study.在德国,与医生的判断相比,从生活在痴呆症中的人群中引出对以患者为中心的护理的定量、基于选择的偏好:混合方法 PreDemCare 研究的研究方案。
BMC Geriatr. 2022 Jul 8;22(1):567. doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03238-6.
10
Multiple Stakeholders' Perspectives on Respite Service Access for People With Dementia and Their Carers.多利益相关者对痴呆症患者及其照顾者获得暂息服务的看法。
Gerontologist. 2019 Sep 17;59(5):e490-e500. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnz095.

引用本文的文献

1
Engaging Community Reviewers: The Geriatric Emergency Care Applied Research (2.0)-Advancing Dementia Care Network Approach.吸引社区评审员:老年急诊护理应用研究(2.0)——推进痴呆症护理网络方法
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2025 May 16. doi: 10.1111/jgs.19515.
2
Ethics, design, and implementation criteria of digital assistive technologies for people with dementia from a multiple stakeholder perspective: a qualitative study.从多方利益相关者角度看痴呆症患者的数字辅助技术的伦理、设计和实施标准:一项定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2024 Jul 27;25(1):84. doi: 10.1186/s12910-024-01080-6.
3
Correlations between Dementia and Loneliness.

本文引用的文献

1
Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care-Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy Process Survey.开发以患者为中心的痴呆症护理为导向的定量偏好工具 - 第 2 阶段:形成性定性研究的见解,以设计和预测试痴呆症友好的层次分析法调查。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jul 13;19(14):8554. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19148554.
2
Development of a Quantitative Instrument to Elicit Patient Preferences for Person-Centered Dementia Care Stage 1: A Formative Qualitative Study to Identify Patient Relevant Criteria for Experimental Design of an Analytic Hierarchy Process.开发一种用于引出患者对以患者为中心的痴呆症护理阶段偏好的定量工具:一项形成性定性研究,旨在确定用于分析层次过程实验设计的患者相关标准。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 22;19(13):7629. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19137629.
3
痴呆症与孤独感之间的相关性。
Int J Mol Sci. 2023 Dec 24;25(1):271. doi: 10.3390/ijms25010271.
Strategies for working across Canadian practice-based research and learning networks (PBRLNs) in primary care: focus on frailty.在加拿大初级保健实践为基础的研究和学习网络(PBRLN)中工作的策略:关注虚弱。
BMC Fam Pract. 2021 Nov 12;22(1):220. doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01573-y.
4
[Implementation of a cross-sectoral care concept : Results of a secondary data analysis].[跨部门护理概念的实施:二次数据分析结果]
Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2022 Nov;55(7):583-589. doi: 10.1007/s00391-021-01967-8. Epub 2021 Aug 30.
5
Stakeholder involvement in dementia research: A qualitative approach with healthy senior citizens and providers of dementia care in Germany.利益相关者参与痴呆症研究:德国健康老年人和痴呆症护理提供者的定性方法。
Health Soc Care Community. 2022 May;30(3):908-917. doi: 10.1111/hsc.13238. Epub 2020 Dec 23.
6
Attitudes towards advanced nursing roles in primary dementia care - Results of an observational study in Germany.初级痴呆症护理中高级护理角色的态度 - 德国观察研究的结果。
J Adv Nurs. 2021 Apr;77(4):1800-1812. doi: 10.1111/jan.14705. Epub 2020 Dec 10.
7
Patient and Public Involvement in Identifying Dementia Research Priorities.患者和公众参与确定痴呆症研究重点。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018 Aug;66(8):1608-1612. doi: 10.1111/jgs.15453. Epub 2018 Aug 7.
8
An Online Platform to Support the Network of Caregivers of People with Dementia.一个支持痴呆症患者护理人员网络的在线平台。
J Aging Res. 2017;2017:3076859. doi: 10.1155/2017/3076859. Epub 2017 Aug 15.
9
Research priorities to reduce the global burden of dementia by 2025.到 2025 年降低全球痴呆症负担的研究重点。
Lancet Neurol. 2016 Nov;15(12):1285-1294. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)30235-6. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
10
Team Science Approach to Developing Consensus on Research Good Practices for Practice-Based Research Networks: A Case Study.基于团队科学方法就实践型研究网络的研究良好实践达成共识:一项案例研究。
Clin Transl Sci. 2015 Dec;8(6):632-7. doi: 10.1111/cts.12363. Epub 2015 Nov 25.