Research agendas involving patients: Factors that facilitate or impede translation of patients' perspectives in programming and implementation

被引:21
作者
Pittens, Carina A. C. M. [1 ]
Elberse, Janneke E. [1 ]
Visse, Merel [2 ]
Abma, Tineke A. [2 ]
Broerse, Jacqueline E. W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Fac Earth & Life Sci, Athena Inst Res Innovat & Commun Hlth & Life Sci, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ Amsterdam Med Ctr, EMGO Inst Hlth & Care Res, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Dialogue model; the Netherlands; priority setting; patient involvement; research agenda-setting; patients and researchers' research priorities; HEALTH RESEARCH; RESEARCH PRIORITIES; DECISION-MAKING; INVOLVEMENT; PARTICIPATION; UNCERTAINTIES; PARTNERS; FUTURE; PEOPLE; CARE;
D O I
10.1093/scipol/scu010
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Patients are increasingly involved in agenda setting in health research policy, but little is known about whether or not patients' topics are translated into a funding programme and taken up by researchers. A qualitative evaluation of nine multi-stakeholder agenda-setting projects in the Netherlands was conducted. Document study and 54 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were undertaken. Three strategies for the translation of research agendas into research programmes were identified: first, one-on-one translation; second, agendas were used to adapt general policies; and third, no translation. A number of factors, facilitating or impeding this translation, were identified, relating to the context or the process of programming and implementation. Context appeared to be crucial: positive attitudes towards patient involvement, good relations between stakeholders and supportive characteristics of organizations. Patient involvement was rarely sustained during programming and implementation. These insights contribute to more effective procedures for programming and implementing research agendas.
引用
收藏
页码:809 / 820
页数:12
相关论文
共 59 条
  • [51] What Does It Mean to Be a Patient Research Partner? An Ethnodrama
    Schipper, Karen
    Abma, Tineke A.
    van Zadelhoff, Ezra
    van de Griendt, Joos
    Nierse, Christi
    Widdershoven, Guy A. M.
    [J]. QUALITATIVE INQUIRY, 2010, 16 (06) : 501 - 510
  • [52] Staley K., 2008, RES PRIORITY SETTING
  • [53] User involvement in the development of a research bid: barriers, enablers and impacts
    Staniszewska, Sophie
    Jones, Nicola
    Newburn, Mary
    Marshall, Shanit
    [J]. HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2007, 10 (02) : 173 - 183
  • [54] Patients' and clinicians' research priorities
    Stewart, Ruth J.
    Caird, Jenny
    Oliver, Kathryn
    Oliver, Sandy
    [J]. HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2011, 14 (04) : 439 - 448
  • [55] Teerling J, 2004, PROGRAMMERING WETENS
  • [56] Telford R., 2002, British Journal of Clinical Governance, V7, P92, DOI DOI 10.1108/14664100210427606
  • [57] Patient issues in health research and quality of care: an inventory and data synthesis
    Teunissen, Truus
    Visse, Merel
    de Boer, Pim
    Abma, Tineke A.
    [J]. HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2013, 16 (04) : 308 - 322
  • [58] van de Griendt J., 2011, HLTH EXPECTATIONS, V15, P242
  • [59] van Engelen B., 2007, KWALITEIT GEZONDHEID