• 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

“激发中文母语者表达自己是最大的障碍”:一项定性研究中国研究人员对患者参与研究的障碍和促进因素的看法。

'Motivating Implicit Chinese to Express Themselves Is the Biggest Barrier': A Qualitative Study of Chinese Researchers' Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators to Patient Engagement in Research.

机构信息

Department of Nursing, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.

School of Nursing, Shanghai JiaoTong University, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2024 Dec;27(6):e70112. doi: 10.1111/hex.70112.

DOI:10.1111/hex.70112
PMID:39572878
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11581954/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patient Engagement in Research (PER) has demonstrated benefits for patients, researchers and research outcomes. However, China lacks substantial experience in implementing PER. The implementation of PER in China faces unique challenges due to social-cultural differences. This study explores the perspectives of Chinese researchers to identify barriers and facilitators, aiming to guide future PER initiatives and enhance the role of patients in research.

METHOD

Purposive sampling was employed to recruit clinical researchers with diverse healthcare backgrounds in China. Semi-structured interviews, conducted by a qualified researcher, followed interview guidelines derived from a literature review and pilot study modifications. Thematic analysis was applied using QSR Nvivo 8.0.

RESULTS

A total of 13 participants were included. Five main themes were identified from interview: (1) selection of patients for research engagement, (2) strategies to alleviate the patient burden in implementing PER, (3) strategies to encourage patients for active expression, (4) benefits to attract patient engagement and (5) researcher's preparation.

CONCLUSION

The cultural trait of 'reservedness' in Chinese culture hinders active expression by patients in the research engagement process. Researchers tend to recruit patients with specific characteristics and emphasize the importance of aligning benefits with patient values to motivate engagement. Addressing patient burden is crucial, and researchers should be well-prepared before PER. These findings underscore the necessity of adopting culturally adapted strategies in PER to effectively address specific challenges.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The public participated in the interpretation of the interview results, enriching our understanding of the results.

摘要

背景

患者参与研究(PER)已被证明对患者、研究人员和研究结果都有益处。然而,中国在实施 PER 方面经验不足。由于社会文化差异,PER 在我国的实施面临着独特的挑战。本研究旨在探讨中国研究人员的观点,以确定障碍和促进因素,为未来的 PER 计划提供指导,并增强患者在研究中的作用。

方法

采用目的抽样法,在中国招募具有不同医疗背景的临床研究人员。合格的研究人员采用半结构式访谈,访谈指南来源于文献综述和试点研究的修改。使用 QSR Nvivo 8.0 进行主题分析。

结果

共纳入 13 名参与者。访谈中确定了五个主要主题:(1)选择参与研究的患者,(2)减轻实施 PER 中患者负担的策略,(3)鼓励患者积极表达的策略,(4)吸引患者参与的益处,以及(5)研究人员的准备。

结论

中国文化中的“含蓄”文化特征阻碍了患者在研究参与过程中的积极表达。研究人员倾向于招募具有特定特征的患者,并强调将利益与患者价值观保持一致以激励参与的重要性。解决患者负担是至关重要的,研究人员在进行 PER 之前应做好充分准备。这些发现强调了在 PER 中采用文化适应性策略的必要性,以有效地应对特定的挑战。

患者或公众的贡献

公众参与了访谈结果的解释,丰富了我们对结果的理解。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c25f/11581954/4c4c0d5b2a37/HEX-27-e70112-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c25f/11581954/4c4c0d5b2a37/HEX-27-e70112-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c25f/11581954/4c4c0d5b2a37/HEX-27-e70112-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
'Motivating Implicit Chinese to Express Themselves Is the Biggest Barrier': A Qualitative Study of Chinese Researchers' Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators to Patient Engagement in Research.“激发中文母语者表达自己是最大的障碍”:一项定性研究中国研究人员对患者参与研究的障碍和促进因素的看法。
Health Expect. 2024 Dec;27(6):e70112. doi: 10.1111/hex.70112.
2
Evaluating ChatGPT in Qualitative Thematic Analysis With Human Researchers in the Japanese Clinical Context and Its Cultural Interpretation Challenges: Comparative Qualitative Study.在日本临床背景下与人类研究人员一起在定性主题分析中评估ChatGPT及其文化解释挑战:比较定性研究
J Med Internet Res. 2025 Apr 24;27:e71521. doi: 10.2196/71521.
3
Barriers and Facilitators of NHS Health Checks in Socioeconomically Deprived Communities in the North East of England: A Qualitative Study With Peer Researchers.英格兰东北部社会经济贫困社区国民保健服务健康检查的障碍与促进因素:一项与同行研究者开展的定性研究
Health Expect. 2025 Apr;28(2):e70199. doi: 10.1111/hex.70199.
4
Supporting wellness after cancer treatment for women from Chinese, Vietnamese, and Arabic backgrounds: a qualitative study of healthcare provider views.为华裔、越南裔和阿拉伯裔背景的女性提供癌症治疗后的健康支持:一项关于医疗服务提供者观点的定性研究
Support Care Cancer. 2025 Apr 17;33(5):394. doi: 10.1007/s00520-025-09417-6.
5
Patient and researcher experiences of patient engagement in primary care health care research: A participatory qualitative study.患者和研究人员对初级保健医疗研究中患者参与的体验:一项参与式定性研究。
Health Expect. 2022 Oct;25(5):2365-2376. doi: 10.1111/hex.13542. Epub 2022 Jul 22.
6
"Let them be": Family members' perspectives on the participation of advanced cancer patients in nursing research: A qualitative descriptive study.“让他们参与”:癌症晚期患者家庭成员对其参与护理研究的看法:一项定性描述性研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2024 Jul;155:104772. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104772. Epub 2024 Apr 10.
7
Public involvement in chronic respiratory diseases research: A qualitative study of patients', carers' and citizens' perspectives.公众参与慢性呼吸道疾病研究:对患者、护理人员和公民观点的定性研究。
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13917. doi: 10.1111/hex.13917.
8
Perceptions of barriers and facilitators to engaging in implementation science: a qualitative study.参与实施科学的障碍和促进因素的认知:一项定性研究。
Public Health. 2020 Aug;185:318-323. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.06.016. Epub 2020 Jul 25.
9
Between Public Guidelines for User Involvement and Ideals About Free Research: Using Collaborative Autoethnography to Explore Researcher Experiences From a User Involvement Process.在公众参与用户指南和自由研究理念之间:使用合作自传法探索用户参与过程中的研究人员的经验。
Health Expect. 2024 Oct;27(5):e70055. doi: 10.1111/hex.70055.
10
Researchers' perspectives on public involvement in health research in Singapore: The argument for a community-based approach.研究人员对新加坡公众参与健康研究的看法:基于社区方法的论据。
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):666-675. doi: 10.1111/hex.12915. Epub 2019 Jul 19.

本文引用的文献

1
Operationalizing the principles of patient engagement through a Patient Advisory Council: Lessons and recommendations.通过患者顾问委员会使患者参与原则运作化:经验教训和建议。
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13909. doi: 10.1111/hex.13909. Epub 2023 Nov 9.
2
Diversity in patient and public involvement in healthcare research and education-Realising the potential.患者和公众参与医疗保健研究和教育的多样性——挖掘潜力。
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13896. doi: 10.1111/hex.13896. Epub 2023 Oct 23.
3
Patient-identified priorities for successful partnerships in patient-oriented research.
患者确定的以患者为导向的研究中成功合作的优先事项。
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Sep 7;8(1):49. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00384-4.
4
Challenges in co-designing an intervention to increase mobility in older patients: a qualitative study.共同设计干预措施以增加老年患者活动能力的挑战:一项定性研究。
J Health Organ Manag. 2021 Apr 9;35(9):140-162. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-02-2020-0049.
5
A qualitative evaluation of coproduction of research: 'If you do it properly, you will get turbulence'.研究共创的定性评价:“如果做得恰当,你将获得激荡。”
Health Expect. 2022 Oct;25(5):2034-2042. doi: 10.1111/hex.13261. Epub 2021 May 5.
6
Shortening and validation of the Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS) for measuring meaningful patient and family caregiver engagement.缩短和验证患者参与研究量表(PEIRS),以衡量有意义的患者和家庭照顾者参与度。
Health Expect. 2021 Jun;24(3):863-879. doi: 10.1111/hex.13227. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
7
Attitudes of Homebound Older Adults and Their Caregivers Toward Research and Participation as Research Advisors.居家老年患者及其照护者对研究的态度和作为研究顾问的参与意愿。
Gerontologist. 2021 Nov 15;61(8):1202-1210. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnaa189.
8
Researchers, patients, and other stakeholders' perspectives on challenges to and strategies for engagement.研究人员、患者及其他利益相关者对参与面临的挑战及策略的看法。
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Oct 7;6:60. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00227-0. eCollection 2020.
9
Defining Patient Engagement in Research: Results of a Systematic Review and Analysis: Report of the ISPOR Patient-Centered Special Interest Group.定义研究中的患者参与:系统评价和分析的结果:ISPOR 以患者为中心的特别兴趣小组的报告。
Value Health. 2020 Jun;23(6):677-688. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.01.019. Epub 2020 May 23.
10
Lessons for Patient Engagement in Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.低收入和中等收入国家患者参与研究的经验教训。
Ophthalmol Ther. 2020 Jun;9(2):221-229. doi: 10.1007/s40123-020-00246-w. Epub 2020 Mar 28.