• 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
Development of a Framework for Youth- and Family-Specific Engagement in Research: Proposal for a Scoping Review and Qualitative Descriptive Study.制定针对青年和家庭的研究参与框架:范围综述和定性描述性研究的提案
JMIR Res Protoc. 2025 Mar 28;14:e65733. doi: 10.2196/65733.
2
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
3
The use of Open Dialogue in Trauma Informed Care services for mental health consumers and their family networks: A scoping review.创伤知情护理服务中使用开放对话模式为心理健康消费者及其家庭网络提供服务:范围综述。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2024 Aug;31(4):681-698. doi: 10.1111/jpm.13023. Epub 2024 Jan 17.
4
How to Implement Digital Clinical Consultations in UK Maternity Care: the ARM@DA Realist Review.如何在英国产科护理中实施数字临床会诊:ARM@DA实证主义综述
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 May 21:1-77. doi: 10.3310/WQFV7425.
5
Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.性虐待和暴力的心理社会干预的幸存者、家庭和专业人员的经验:定性证据综合。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 4;10(10):CD013648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013648.pub2.
6
Can We Enhance Shared Decision-making for Periacetabular Osteotomy Surgery? A Qualitative Study of Patient Experiences.我们能否加强髋臼周围截骨术的共同决策?一项关于患者体验的定性研究。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2025 Jan 1;483(1):120-136. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003198. Epub 2024 Jul 23.
7
How lived experiences of illness trajectories, burdens of treatment, and social inequalities shape service user and caregiver participation in health and social care: a theory-informed qualitative evidence synthesis.疾病轨迹的生活经历、治疗负担和社会不平等如何影响服务使用者和照顾者参与健康和社会护理:一项基于理论的定性证据综合分析
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Jun;13(24):1-120. doi: 10.3310/HGTQ8159.
8
A Scoping Review of the Observed and Perceived Functional Impacts Associated With Language and Learning Disorders in School-Aged Children.一项关于学龄儿童语言和学习障碍相关的观察到的和感知到的功能影响的范围综述。
Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2025 Jul-Aug;60(4):e70086. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.70086.
9
Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.从临床试验参与者中获取不良反应数据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jan 16;1(1):MR000039. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000039.pub2.
10
The Lived Experience of Autistic Adults in Employment: A Systematic Search and Synthesis.成年自闭症患者的就业生活经历:系统检索与综述
Autism Adulthood. 2024 Dec 2;6(4):495-509. doi: 10.1089/aut.2022.0114. eCollection 2024 Dec.

引用本文的文献

1
Knowledge user perspectives on integrated knowledge translation (iKT) in health interventions research for people with multiple sclerosis: a qualitative descriptive study.多发性硬化症患者健康干预研究中综合知识转化(iKT)的知识使用者观点:一项定性描述性研究
Res Involv Engagem. 2025 Jul 28;11(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s40900-025-00763-7.

本文引用的文献

1
Benefits, barriers and recommendations for youth engagement in health research: combining evidence-based and youth perspectives.青年参与健康研究的益处、障碍及建议:结合循证观点与青年视角
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Sep 2;10(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00607-w.
2
Patient, caregiver and other knowledge user engagement in consensus-building healthcare initiatives: a scoping review protocol.患者、照护者和其他知识使用者参与制定共识的医疗保健举措:范围综述方案。
BMJ Open. 2024 May 8;14(5):e080822. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080822.
3
Social and Structural Drivers of Health and Transition to Adult Care.社会和结构性因素对健康的影响及向成人保健的过渡。
Pediatrics. 2024 Jan 1;153(1). doi: 10.1542/peds.2023-062275.
4
Reflections on patient engagement by patient partners: how it can go wrong.患者合作伙伴对患者参与的反思:可能出现的问题。
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Jun 12;9(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00454-1.
5
The Impact of Patient and Family Engagement in Child Health Research: A Scoping Review.患者及家庭参与儿童健康研究的影响:一项范围综述
J Pediatr. 2023 Feb;253:115-128. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2022.09.030. Epub 2022 Sep 27.
6
Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests.定性研究中饱和度的样本量:实证检验的系统综述。
Soc Sci Med. 2022 Jan;292:114523. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523. Epub 2021 Nov 2.
7
Pragmatism as a paradigm for patient-oriented research.实用主义作为一种面向患者的研究范式。
Health Expect. 2022 Feb;25(1):38-47. doi: 10.1111/hex.13384. Epub 2021 Nov 8.
8
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.
9
Conducting high quality scoping reviews-challenges and solutions.高质量范围综述的实施:挑战与解决方案。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Feb;130:156-160. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.10.009. Epub 2020 Oct 26.
10
Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews.范围综述实施的更新方法学指南。
JBI Evid Synth. 2020 Oct;18(10):2119-2126. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167.

制定针对青年和家庭的研究参与框架:范围综述和定性描述性研究的提案

Development of a Framework for Youth- and Family-Specific Engagement in Research: Proposal for a Scoping Review and Qualitative Descriptive Study.

作者信息

Munce Sarah E P, Jarrett Clementine, Senthilnathan Vjura, Luong Dorothy, Allemang Brooke, Bailey Katherine, Biddiss Elaine, Britto Maria T, Buchanan Francine, Cassidy Christine, Cross Andrea, Cunningham Jessie, Dimitropoulos Gina, Hadland Scott E, Kastner Monika, Killackey Tieghan, Kokorelias Kristina, Macarthur Colin, Micsinszki Samantha, Niles Chavon, Wright F Virginia, Toulany Alene

机构信息

Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Bloorview Research Institute, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

JMIR Res Protoc. 2025 Mar 28;14:e65733. doi: 10.2196/65733.

DOI:10.2196/65733
PMID:40153797
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11992488/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Youth and families play an indispensable role in health research, given their unique lived experiences and expertise. Aligning research with patients' needs, values, and preferences can significantly enhance its relevance and impact; however, recent research has highlighted various challenges and risks associated with youth and family engagement in health research. These challenges encompass the perils of tokenism, power imbalances and dynamics, questioning the motives behind engagement, and limited accessibility to patient-friendly training for patient partners, as well as inadequate training on patient engagement for researchers and the absence of equitable engagement tools. To address these risks and challenges, different patient engagement models, theories, frameworks, and guiding principles have been developed and adopted; to date, however, their transferability to youth- and family-specific engagement in research has been limited.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this project are (1) to determine the extent of the literature on the application of patient engagement models, theories, frameworks, and guiding principles in the context of youth-specific research; and (2) to determine how meaningful the key components and constructs of these models, theories, frameworks, and guiding principles are to youth and their family members.

METHODS

This project will use an integrated knowledge translation approach and consists of 2 phases: (1) a scoping review to identify patient engagement models, theories, frameworks and guiding principles in youth research; and (2) a qualitative descriptive study using one-on-one semistructured interviews with youth and family members to understand their conceptualization of meaningful engagement in health research. For phase 1, the following databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Literature from 2013 to August 28, 2024, was captured. Primary studies using a patient engagement in research model, theory, or framework, or guiding principles, in youth will be included. The risk of bias of included studies will not be assessed. Extracted data will be quantitatively summarized using numerical counts and qualitatively using content analysis. For phase 2, we will recruit 9 to 17 youth and 9 to 17 family members. Transcripts will be analyzed using an inductive approach outlined by Braun and Clarke.

RESULTS

The project has received funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. A 9-member integrated knowledge translation panel consisting of 6 youth and 3 family members has been established.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings from this study will identify what is currently known about the application of patient engagement models, theories, frameworks, and guiding principles in youth-specific research and the important components of these models, theories, frameworks, and guiding principles from the perspective of youth and their families. These findings will be instrumental to developing a youth- and family-specific engagement in research framework called the UNITE framework and subsequently, a validated measure.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/65733.

摘要

背景

鉴于年轻人及其家庭独特的生活经历和专业知识,他们在健康研究中发挥着不可或缺的作用。使研究与患者的需求、价值观和偏好保持一致,可以显著提高研究的相关性和影响力;然而,最近的研究强调了年轻人及其家庭参与健康研究所面临的各种挑战和风险。这些挑战包括形式主义的危害、权力不平衡及动态变化、对参与背后动机的质疑、患者伙伴难以获得适合患者的培训,以及研究人员在患者参与方面的培训不足和缺乏公平的参与工具。为应对这些风险和挑战,已开发并采用了不同的患者参与模式、理论、框架和指导原则;然而,迄今为止,它们在针对年轻人及其家庭的研究参与中的可转移性有限。

目的

本项目的目标是:(1)确定关于患者参与模式、理论、框架和指导原则在针对年轻人的研究中的应用的文献范围;(2)确定这些模式、理论、框架和指导原则的关键组成部分和结构对年轻人及其家庭成员的意义。

方法

本项目将采用综合知识转化方法,包括两个阶段:(1)一项范围综述,以确定针对年轻人的研究中的患者参与模式、理论、框架和指导原则;(2)一项定性描述性研究,通过与年轻人及其家庭成员进行一对一的半结构化访谈,了解他们对健康研究中有意义参与的概念化理解。对于第一阶段,检索了以下数据库:医学文献数据库(Medline)、护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE)、心理学文摘数据库(PsycINFO)和考克兰对照试验中心注册库。收集了2013年至2024年8月28日的文献。将纳入在针对年轻人的研究中使用患者参与研究模式、理论、框架或指导原则的原发性研究。将不评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。提取的数据将使用数字计数进行定量汇总,并使用内容分析进行定性汇总。对于第二阶段,我们将招募9至17名年轻人和9至17名家庭成员。将使用布劳恩和克拉克概述的归纳法分析访谈记录。

结果

该项目已获得加拿大卫生研究院的资助。已成立了一个由9名成员组成的综合知识转化小组,其中包括6名年轻人和3名家庭成员。

结论

本研究的结果将确定目前关于患者参与模式、理论、框架和指导原则在针对年轻人的研究中的应用的已知情况,以及从年轻人及其家庭的角度来看这些模式、理论、框架和指导原则的重要组成部分。这些结果将有助于制定一个名为“团结”(UNITE)框架的针对年轻人及其家庭的研究参与框架,随后制定一项经过验证的测量方法。

国际注册报告识别码(IRRID):PRR1-10.2196/65733。