Future directions for patient engagement in research: a participatory workshop with Canadian patient partners and academic researchers

被引:7
作者
Chudyk, Anna Maria [1 ]
Stoddard, Roger [2 ]
Duhamel, Todd A. [3 ,4 ]
Schultz, Annette S. H.
机构
[1] Univ Manitoba, Coll Pharm, Rady Fac Hlth Sci, CR3024-369 Tache Ave, Winnipeg, MB R2H 2A6, Canada
[2] Horizon Hlth Network, 80 Woodbridge St, Fredericton, NB E3B 4R3, Canada
[3] Fac Kinesiol & Recreat Management, 212 Act Living Ctr, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada
[4] St Boniface Gen Hosp, Inst Cardiovasc Sci, Albrechtsen Res Ctr, 351 Tache Ave, Winnipeg, MB R2H 2A6, Canada
关键词
Patient engagement; Patient engagement in research; Patient-oriented research; Participatory workshop; Patient and public involvement; Patient involvement; Multi-stakeholder engagement; Capacity building; Participatory process;
D O I
10.1186/s12961-024-01106-w
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundPatient engagement in research (also commonly referred to as patient or patient and public involvement in research) strives to transform health research wherein patients (including caregivers and the public) are regularly and actively engaged as multidisciplinary research team members (i.e. patient partners) working jointly towards improved health outcomes and an enhanced healthcare system. To support its mindful evolution into a staple of health research, this participatory study aimed to identify future directions for Canadian patient engagement in research and discusses its findings in the context of the international literature.MethodsThe study met its aim through a multi-meeting pan-Canadian virtual workshop. Participants (n = 30) included Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research-funded academic researchers and patient partners identified through a publicly available database, personal and professional networks and social media. All spoke English, could access the workshop virtually, and provided written informed consent. The workshop was composed of four, 1.5-3-h virtual meetings wherein participants discussed the current and preferred future states of Canadian patient engagement in research. Workshop discussions (i.e. data) were video and audio recorded. Themes were generated through an iterative process of inductive thematic analysis that occurred concurrently with the multi-week workshop.ResultsOur participatory and iterative process identified 10 targetable areas of focus for the future of Canadian patient engagement in research. Five were categorized as system-level (systemic integration; academic culture; engagement networks; funding models; compensation models), one as researcher-level (engagement processes), and four crossed both levels (awareness; diversity and recruitment; training, tools and education; evaluation and impact). System level targetable areas called for reshaping the patient engagement ecosystem to create a legitimized and supportive space for patient engagement to be a staple component of a learning health system. Researcher level targetable areas called for academic researchers and patient partners to collaboratively generate evidence and apply knowledge to inform values and behaviours necessary to foster and sustain supportive health research spaces that are accessible to all.ConclusionsFuture directions for Canadian patient engagement in research span 10 interconnected targetable areas that require strong leadership and joint action between patient partners, academic researchers, and health and research institutions if patient engagement is to become a ubiquitous component of a learning health system.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
Adelman C., 1993, Educational Action Research, V1, P7, DOI DOI 10.1080/0965079930010102
[2]   Social science and health research: Growth at the National Institutes of Health [J].
Bachrach, CA ;
Abeles, RP .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2004, 94 (01) :22-28
[3]   Moving patient-oriented research forward: thoughts from the next generation of knowledge translation researchers [J].
Andrea C. Bishop ;
Meghan J. Elliott ;
Christine Cassidy .
Research Involvement and Engagement, 4 (1)
[4]   One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? [J].
Braun, Virginia ;
Clarke, Victoria .
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 18 (03) :328-352
[5]  
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, 2011, CAN STRAT PAT OR RES
[6]  
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, 2019, STRAT PAT OR RES PAT
[7]  
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, 2021, About SPOR
[8]   Questioning patient engagement: research scientists' perceptions of the challenges of patient engagement in a cardiovascular research network [J].
Carroll, Sandra L. ;
Embuldeniya, Gayathri ;
Abelson, Julia ;
McGillion, Michael ;
Berkesse, Alexandre ;
Healey, Jeff S. .
PATIENT PREFERENCE AND ADHERENCE, 2017, 11 :1573-1583
[9]   Exploring patient and caregiver perceptions of the meaning of the patient partner role: a qualitative study [J].
Chudyk A.M. ;
Stoddard R. ;
McCleary N. ;
Duhamel T.A. ;
Shimmin C. ;
Hickes S. ;
Schultz A.S.H. .
Research Involvement and Engagement, 9 (1)
[10]   Activities and impacts of patient engagement in CIHR SPOR funded research: a cross-sectional survey of academic researcher and patient partner experiences [J].
Chudyk A.M. ;
Stoddard R. ;
McCleary N. ;
Duhamel T.A. ;
Shimmin C. ;
Hickes S. ;
Schultz A.S.H. .
Research Involvement and Engagement, 8 (1)