Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Institute for Better Health, Trillium Health Partners.
Health Expect. 2023 Oct;26(5):1806-1819. doi: 10.1111/hex.13779. Epub 2023 Jun 6.
There is growing evidence demonstrating the impact of engaging people with lived experience (PWLE) in health research. However, it remains unclear what evidence is available regarding the impact of engagement specific to mental health and substance use research.
A scoping review of three databases and thematic analysis were conducted. Sixty-one articles that described the impact of engagement in mental health and substance use research on either individual experiences or the research process were included.
Key topics include (a) the impact of engagement on individual experiences; (b) the impact of engagement on the research process; and (c) facilitators and barriers to impactful engagement. Studies largely focused on the perceived positive impact of engagement on PWLE (e.g., personal and professional growth, empowering and rewarding experience, feeling heard and valued), researchers (e.g., rewarding experience, deeper understanding of research topic, changes to practice), and study participants (e.g., added value, fostered a safe space). Engagement activities were perceived to improve facets of the research process, such as improvements to research quality (e.g., rigour, trustworthiness, relevance to the community), research components (e.g., recruitment), and the research environment (e.g., shifted power dynamics). Facilitators and barriers were mapped onto the lived experience, researcher, team, and institutional levels. Commonly used terminologies for engagement and PWLE were discussed.
Engaging PWLE-from consultation to co-creation throughout the research cycle-is perceived as having a positive impact on both the research process and individual experiences. Future research is needed to bring consistency to engagement, leverage the facilitators to engagement, and address the barriers, and in turn generate research findings that have value not only to the scientific community, but also to the people impacted by the science.
PWLE were engaged throughout the scoping review process, including the screening phase, analysis phase, and write-up phase.
越来越多的证据表明,让有亲身经历的人(PWLE)参与健康研究具有重要影响。然而,目前尚不清楚有哪些证据表明参与特定于心理健康和物质使用研究的影响。
对三个数据库进行了范围界定审查,并进行了主题分析。纳入了 61 篇描述了在心理健康和物质使用研究中参与对个人体验或研究过程的影响的文章。
主要主题包括:(a)参与对个人体验的影响;(b)参与对研究过程的影响;和(c)促进和阻碍有影响力的参与的因素。研究主要集中在参与对 PWLE 的感知积极影响上(例如,个人和职业成长、赋权和有价值的体验、被听到和被重视的感觉)、研究人员(例如,有价值的体验、对研究主题的更深入理解、实践的改变)和研究参与者(例如,增加价值、营造安全空间)。参与活动被认为可以改善研究过程的各个方面,例如提高研究质量(例如,严谨性、可信度、与社区的相关性)、研究组成部分(例如,招募)和研究环境(例如,改变权力动态)。促进因素和障碍被映射到亲身体验、研究人员、团队和机构层面。还讨论了常用于参与和 PWLE 的术语。
让 PWLE 参与——从咨询到整个研究周期的共同创造——被认为对研究过程和个人体验都具有积极影响。需要进一步的研究来使参与保持一致,利用促进参与的因素,并解决障碍,从而产生不仅对科学界有价值,而且对受科学影响的人也有价值的研究结果。
PWLE 在整个范围界定审查过程中都有参与,包括筛选阶段、分析阶段和撰写阶段。