A Novel Stakeholder Engagement Approach for Patient-centered Outcomes Research

被引:28
作者
Kim, Katherine K. [1 ]
Khodyakov, Dmitry [2 ]
Marie, Kate [3 ]
Taras, Howard [4 ]
Meeker, Daniella [5 ]
Campos, Hugo O. [6 ]
Ohno-Machado, Lucila [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Davis, Betty Irene Moore Sch Nursing, 2450 48th St,Suite 2600, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA
[2] RAND Corp, Santa Monica, CA USA
[3] Univ Calif Davis, Ctr Hlth & Technol, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA
[4] Univ Calif San Diego, Sch Med, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
[5] Univ Southern Calif, Sch Med, Los Angeles, CA USA
[6] 4728 Allendale Ave, Oakland, CA USA
关键词
patient-centered outcomes research; community-based participatory research; modified Delphi; stakeholder engagement; HEALTH;
D O I
10.1097/MLR.0000000000000790
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
Introduction/Objectives:The engagement of patients and other stakeholders is a critical element in the design of patient-centered outcomes research studies. However, methodology for scalable engagement in research management particularly activities such as operationalization of principles and setting of priorities is not well-developed. The objective of this study is to describe a novel approach for scalable stakeholder engagement in research aligned with the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) engagement principles, which was evaluated in a national clinical data research network.Materials and Methods:Patient, patient advocate, clinician, and researcher stakeholders were recruited from clinical sites, as well as social media sites related to the 3 conditions of focus, heart failure, obesity, and Kawasaki disease. The engagement strategy was designed, implemented, and mapped to the PCORI engagement principles. Evaluation included internal assessment and quantitative measures of online engagement.Results:We operationalized the PCORI principles with 12 stakeholder engagement strategies and convened stakeholder advisory boards and online research prioritization panels to determine research priorities in a rigorous, deliberative process. A total of 46 advisors (20 patients) and 339 panelists (159 patients) actively participated. There were not significant differences between patients and clinicians in level of online engagement. Nonetheless, while patients reported a slightly greater challenge with following online discussion, they overall had a more favorable opinion about use of the online format.Discussion/Conclusion:An efficient way to engage large numbers of representative stakeholders in research is a necessary first step to assure the public of trustworthy use of data networks for health research. This paper describes a comprehensive approach to engagement in patient-centered outcomes research management that informs ongoing development of rigorous methodologies in this area.
引用
收藏
页码:S41 / S47
页数:7
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]   Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: A narrative review of case examples [J].
Boote, Jonathan ;
Baird, Wendy ;
Beecroft, Claire .
HEALTH POLICY, 2010, 95 (01) :10-23
[2]   Understanding An Informed Public's Views On The Role Of Evidence In Making Health Care Decisions [J].
Carman, Kristin L. ;
Maurer, Maureen ;
Mangrum, Rikki ;
Yang, Manshu ;
Ginsburg, Marjorie ;
Sofaer, Shoshanna ;
Gold, Marthe R. ;
Pathak-Sen, Ela ;
Gilmore, Dierdre ;
Richmond, Jennifer ;
Siegel, Joanna .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2016, 35 (04) :566-574
[3]   Reducing the Burden of Suicide in the US The Aspirational Research Goals of the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention Research Prioritization Task Force [J].
Claassen, Cynthia A. ;
Pearson, Jane L. ;
Khodyakov, Dmitry ;
Satow, Phillip M. ;
Gebbia, Robert ;
Berman, Alan L. ;
Reidenberg, Daniel J. ;
Feldman, Saul ;
Molock, Sherry ;
Carras, Michelle C. ;
Lento, Rene M. ;
Sherrill, Joel ;
Pringle, Beverly ;
Dalai, Siddhartha ;
Insel, Thomas R. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2014, 47 (03) :309-314
[4]   A New Taxonomy for Stakeholder Engagement in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research [J].
Concannon, Thomas W. ;
Meissner, Paul ;
Grunbaum, Jo Anne ;
McElwee, Newell ;
Guise, Jeanne-Marie ;
Santa, John ;
Conway, Patrick H. ;
Daudelin, Denise ;
Morrato, Elaine H. ;
Leslie, Laurel K. .
JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2012, 27 (08) :985-991
[5]   ExpertLens: A system for eliciting opinions from a large pool of non-collocated experts with diverse knowledge [J].
Dalal, Siddhartha ;
Khodyakov, Dmitry ;
Srinivasan, Ramesh ;
Straus, Susan ;
Adams, John .
TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING AND SOCIAL CHANGE, 2011, 78 (08) :1426-1444
[6]   Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement [J].
Deverka, Patricia A. ;
Lavallee, Danielle C. ;
Desai, Priyanka J. ;
Esmail, Laura C. ;
Ramsey, Scott D. ;
Veenstra, David L. ;
Tunis, Sean R. .
JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2012, 1 (02) :181-194
[7]   Patient engagement in research: a systematic review [J].
Domecq, Juan Pablo ;
Prutsky, Gabriela ;
Elraiyah, Tarig ;
Wang, Zhen ;
Nabhan, Mohammed ;
Shippee, Nathan ;
Brito, Juan Pablo ;
Boehmer, Kasey ;
Hasan, Rim ;
Firwana, Belal ;
Erwin, Patricia ;
Eton, David ;
Sloan, Jeff ;
Montori, Victor ;
Asi, Noor ;
Abu Dabrh, Abd Moain ;
Murad, Mohammad Hassan .
BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2014, 14
[8]   A Logic Model for Community Engagement Within the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Consortium: Can We Measure What We Model? [J].
Eder, Milton 'Mickey' ;
Carter-Edwards, Lori ;
Hurd, Thelma C. ;
Rumala, Bernice B. ;
Wallerstein, Nina .
ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2013, 88 (10) :1430-1436
[9]  
Elwyn G, 2006, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V333, P1417
[10]   Identifying and prioritizing uncertainties: patient and clinician engagement in the identification of research questions [J].
Elwyn, Glyn ;
Crowe, Sally ;
Fenton, Mark ;
Firkins, Lester ;
Versnel, Jenny ;
Walker, Samantha ;
Cook, Ivor ;
Holgate, Stephen ;
Higgins, Bernard ;
Gelder, Colin .
JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2010, 16 (03) :627-631