• 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

相似文献

1
Exploring the subjective experience of researchers and co-researchers with lived experience of psychosis high risk states: a qualitative analysis within a participatory research process.探索有精神病高风险状态亲身经历的研究者和共同研究者的主观体验:参与式研究过程中的定性分析。
BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Dec 18;24(1):899. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-06367-x.
2
Subjective experience and meaning of delusions in psychosis: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.精神病中妄想的主观体验与意义:一项系统综述和定性证据综合分析
Lancet Psychiatry. 2022 Jun;9(6):458-476. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00104-3. Epub 2022 May 4.
3
The INSCHOOL project: showcasing participatory qualitative methods derived from patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) work with young people with long-term health conditions.INSCHOOL项目:展示源自患者及公众参与(PPIE)工作的参与式定性方法,该工作针对患有长期健康状况的年轻人开展。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Oct 12;9(1):91. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00496-5.
4
Exploring the value of community engagement activities within a participatory action research study to improve care for people affected by skin neglected tropical diseases in Liberia.在一项参与式行动研究中探索社区参与活动对改善利比里亚皮肤被忽视热带病患者护理的价值。
Res Involv Engagem. 2025 Mar 24;11(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s40900-025-00695-2.
5
Actualizing community-academic partnerships in research: a case study on rural perinatal peer support.在研究中实现社区与学术机构的合作:一项关于农村围产期同伴支持的案例研究
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 Dec 18;8(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00407-0.
6
Bridging the Gap: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Impact of the Involvement of Researchers With Lived Experience on a Multisite Randomised Control Trial in the National Probation Service in England and Wales.弥合差距:一项定性研究,探讨有实际生活经验的研究人员参与对英格兰和威尔士国家缓刑服务机构的一项多地点随机对照试验的影响。
Health Expect. 2025 Feb;28(1):e70162. doi: 10.1111/hex.70162.
7
'Getting involved in research': a co-created, co-delivered and co-analysed course for those with lived experience of health and social care services.“参与研究”:为有健康和社会护理服务亲身经历者共同创建、共同提供和共同分析的课程。
Res Involv Engagem. 2022 May 16;8(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00353-x.
8
The lived experience of co-production: Reflective accounts from the InCLUDE project.共同生产的生活体验:来自“纳入”项目的反思性叙述。
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Oct 14;10(1):104. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00639-2.
9
Create to Collaborate: using creative activity and participatory performance in online workshops to build collaborative research relationships.为合作而创作:在在线工作坊中运用创意活动和参与式表演来建立合作研究关系。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Dec 6;9(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00512-8.
10
Pathways for Strengthening Lived Experience Leadership for Transformative Systems Change: Reflections on Research and Collective Change Strategies.强化生活体验领导力以实现变革性系统变革的途径:对研究和集体变革策略的反思。
Health Expect. 2024 Oct;27(5):e70048. doi: 10.1111/hex.70048.

引用本文的文献

1
Participatory research with co-researchers with lived experience of psychosis high risk states.与有精神病高危状态亲身经历的共同研究者开展参与式研究。
Front Psychiatry. 2025 Jun 2;16:1530093. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1530093. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
The transformative potential of citizen science for mental health.公民科学对心理健康的变革潜力。
Lancet Psychiatry. 2024 Apr;11(4):246-248. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00008-7. Epub 2024 Feb 6.
2
Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in research: The Golden Thread.患者及公众参与和介入研究:金线原则
Nurs Crit Care. 2024 Jan;29(1):10-13. doi: 10.1111/nicc.12921. Epub 2023 May 1.
3
Co-producing research on psychosis: a scoping review on barriers, facilitators and outcomes.关于精神病的合作研究:一项关于障碍、促进因素和结果的范围综述
Int J Ment Health Syst. 2023 Aug 30;17(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s13033-023-00594-7.
4
Considerations for patient and public involvement and engagement in health research.考虑患者和公众在健康研究中的参与和投入。
Nat Med. 2023 Aug;29(8):1922-1929. doi: 10.1038/s41591-023-02445-x. Epub 2023 Jul 20.
5
Cracks that Let the Light in: Collective Reflections on Integrating Lived Experience of Psychosis in Research and Policy in the Context of a Global Commission.裂缝中的光芒:在全球委员会背景下,将精神病患者的生活体验纳入研究和政策中的集体反思。
Community Ment Health J. 2023 Jul;59(5):819-825. doi: 10.1007/s10597-023-01118-w. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
6
From participants to partners: reconceptualising authentic patient engagement roles in youth mental health research.从参与者到合作伙伴:重新构想青少年心理健康研究中真实的患者参与角色。
Lancet Psychiatry. 2023 Feb;10(2):139-145. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00377-7. Epub 2022 Dec 8.
7
The Lancet Commission on ending stigma and discrimination in mental health.柳叶刀心理健康消除耻辱和歧视委员会
Lancet. 2022 Oct 22;400(10361):1438-1480. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01470-2. Epub 2022 Oct 9.
8
Stakeholder views on mindfulness for youth at risk for psychosis.利益相关者对有患精神病风险的青年进行正念的看法。
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2022 Dec;31(6):1390-1404. doi: 10.1111/inm.13038. Epub 2022 Jul 2.
9
The Extent of User Involvement in the Design of Self-tracking Technology for Bipolar Disorder: Literature Review.双相情感障碍自我追踪技术设计中用户参与的程度:文献综述
JMIR Ment Health. 2021 Dec 20;8(12):e27991. doi: 10.2196/27991.
10
Engaging a person with lived experience of mental illness in a collaborative care model feasibility study.让有精神疾病亲身经历的人参与一项协作式照护模式可行性研究。
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Jan 8;7(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s40900-020-00247-w.

探索有精神病高风险状态亲身经历的研究者和共同研究者的主观体验:参与式研究过程中的定性分析。

Exploring the subjective experience of researchers and co-researchers with lived experience of psychosis high risk states: a qualitative analysis within a participatory research process.

作者信息

Trimmel Melanie, Renner Antonia, Mossaheb Nilufar, Friedrich Fabian, Kaltenboeck Alexander, Baumgartner Josef S, Kaisler Raphaela E, Litvan Zsuzsa, Voice Consortium The, Hinterbuchinger Barbara

机构信息

Clinical Division of Social Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Comprehensive Center for Clinical Neurosciences and Mental Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

出版信息

BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Dec 18;24(1):899. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-06367-x.

DOI:10.1186/s12888-024-06367-x
PMID:39696108
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11654180/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The involvement and engagement of people with lived experience is considered increasingly important in health research. A growing corpus of literature on the involvement of people with lived experience of mental health conditions, including people at psychosis high risk states, can be found. This study aims to explore the subjective experience of researchers and co-researchers with lived experience of psychosis high risk states who were involved in a participatory research project.

METHODS

In this study with a combined participatory and qualitative research approach, we used a reflexive thematic analysis approach to systematically analyse open reflection reports from researchers and co-researchers with lived experience of psychosis high risk states, who took part in a participatory research project (VOICE). All participants (n = 12) were asked to anonymously write reflection reports on their subjective experience of participatory research. There were no formal or content-related instructions for writing the reflection reports. Reflection reports provided by eight participants were qualitatively analysed.

RESULTS

Three themes were identified from the analysis of the reflection reports. First "When uncertainty becomes a unifying element - reflecting on expectations and roles". Second "Fostering community growth: creating an environment for collaborative teamwork as well as new and creative directions". Third "Exploring personal and scientific achievements of the project". At the outset of the research project, the researchers' focus was on expectations and reflections on their role within the project, accompanied by a feeling of uncertainty. Subsequently, a sense of community developed within a favourable study framework. Finally, attention focused on research project outcomes and personal achievements within the project.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of the anonymous reflection reports on a participatory research project indicates that there was a positive collaboration between participants with and without lived experience of psychosis high risk states, wherein they were able to interact on an equal footing. Participants reported an experience of equal cooperation and gained relevant personal insights from project participation. Although we do not have clear evidence of experiences of power imbalances or perceived hierarchies based on the analysed reports, these cannot be ruled out and have to be addressed in future research.

摘要

背景

有实际生活经历者的参与在健康研究中日益被认为至关重要。关于有心理健康状况实际生活经历的人群(包括处于精神病高风险状态的人)参与研究的文献越来越多。本研究旨在探索参与一项参与式研究项目的、有精神病高风险状态实际生活经历的研究人员和共同研究人员的主观体验。

方法

在这项采用参与式和定性研究相结合方法的研究中,我们使用反思性主题分析方法,系统分析参与一项参与式研究项目(VOICE)的、有精神病高风险状态实际生活经历的研究人员和共同研究人员的开放式反思报告。所有参与者(n = 12)被要求就他们参与式研究的主观体验匿名撰写反思报告。撰写反思报告没有正式的或与内容相关的指示。对八名参与者提供的反思报告进行了定性分析。

结果

从反思报告分析中确定了三个主题。第一个是“当不确定性成为统一要素时——反思期望和角色”。第二个是“促进社区发展:为团队协作以及新的和创造性的方向创造环境”。第三个是“探索项目的个人和科学成就”。在研究项目开始时,研究人员的重点是对他们在项目中的角色的期望和反思,同时伴有不确定感。随后,在有利的研究框架内形成了一种社区感。最后,注意力集中在研究项目成果和项目中的个人成就上。

结论

对一项参与式研究项目的匿名反思报告的分析表明,有和没有精神病高风险状态实际生活经历的参与者之间存在积极的合作,他们能够平等互动。参与者报告了平等合作的经历,并从项目参与中获得了相关的个人见解。尽管根据分析报告我们没有明确的权力不平衡或感知到的等级制度经历的证据,但这些不能被排除,必须在未来的研究中加以解决。