Literature DB >> 17161402

Service user involvement in nursing, midwifery and health visiting research: a review of evidence and practice.

Elizabeth Smith1, Fiona Ross, Sheila Donovan, Jill Manthorpe, Sally Brearley, John Sitzia, Peter Beresford.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In the UK policy recommends that service users (patients, carers and the public) should be involved in all publicly funded health and social care research. However, little is known about which approaches work best in different research contexts and why. The purpose of this paper is to explain some of the theoretical limitations to current understandings of service user involvement and to provide some suggestions for theory and methods development. This paper draws upon findings from a review of the research 'evidence' and current practice on service user involvement in the design and undertaking of nursing, midwifery and health visiting research.
DESIGN: A multi-method review was commissioned by the NHS Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) Research and Development Programme. The timeframe was April 2004-March 2005. The full report (Ref: SDO/69/2003) and supplementary bibliography are available from: http://www.sdo.lshtm.ac.uk. REVIEW METHODS/DATA: Initial searches of the health and social care literature and consultations with researchers were used to develop a broad definition of the topic area. A service user reference group (26 members) worked with the project team to refine the scope of the review, to set inclusion criteria and develop a framework for the analysis. Systematic searches of the literature were undertaken online and through library stacks (345 relevant documents were identified). Ongoing and recently completed studies that had involved service users were identified through online databases (34 studies) and through a national consultation exercise (17 studies). Selected studies were followed up using telephone interviews (n=11). Members of the service user reference group worked with the research team to advise on key messages for dissemination to different audiences.
RESULTS: Information was gained about contextual factors, drivers, concepts, approaches and outcomes of service user involvement in nursing, midwifery and health visiting research, as well as developments in other research fields. Synthesis of this information shows that there are different purposes and domains for user involvement, either as part of researcher-led or user-led research, or as part of a partnership approach. A number of issues were identified as being important for future research. These include: linking different reasons for service user involvement with different outcomes; understanding the relationship between research data and service user involvement, and developing conceptualisations of user involvement that are capable of accommodating complex research relationships. Suggestions for the development of practice include: consideration of diversity, communication, ethical issues, working relationships, finances, education and training.
CONCLUSIONS: Because research is undertaken for different reasons and in different contexts, it is not possible to say that involving service users will, or should, always be undertaken in the same way to achieve the same benefits. At a research project level uniqueness of purpose is a defining characteristic and strength of service user involvement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17161402     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.09.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Nurs Stud        ISSN: 0020-7489            Impact factor:   5.837


  29 in total

Review 1.  Getting ready for user involvement in a systematic review.

Authors:  Elizabeth Smith; Sheila Donovan; Peter Beresford; Jill Manthorpe; Sally Brearley; John Sitzia; Fiona Ross
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-02-22       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Can the impact of public involvement on research be evaluated? A mixed methods study.

Authors:  Rosemary Barber; Jonathan D Boote; Glenys D Parry; Cindy L Cooper; Philippa Yeeles; Sarah Cook
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Exploring Ethical Issues Related to Patient Engagement in Healthcare: Patient, Clinician and Researcher's Perspectives.

Authors:  Marjorie Montreuil; Joé T Martineau; Eric Racine
Journal:  J Bioeth Inq       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 1.352

Review 4.  'The missing links': understanding how context and mechanism influence the impact of public involvement in research.

Authors:  Kristina Staley; Sarah A Buckland; Helen Hayes; Maryrose Tarpey
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-10-29       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 5.  Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jo Brett; Sophie Staniszewska; Carole Mockford; Sandra Herron-Marx; John Hughes; Colin Tysall; Rashida Suleman
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-07-19       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Developing capacity-building activities for mental health system strengthening in low- and middle-income countries for service users and caregivers, service planners, and researchers.

Authors:  M Semrau; A Alem; J Abdulmalik; S Docrat; S Evans-Lacko; O Gureje; F Kigozi; H Lempp; C Lund; I Petersen; R Shidhaye; G Thornicroft; C Hanlon
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 6.892

Review 7.  Ethical community-engaged research: a literature review.

Authors:  Lisa Mikesell; Elizabeth Bromley; Dmitry Khodyakov
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Talking about living and dying with the oldest old: public involvement in a study on end of life care in care homes.

Authors:  Claire Goodman; Elspeth Mathie; Marion Cowe; Alex Mendoza; Daphne Westwood; Diane Munday; Patricia M Wilson; Clare Crang; Katherine Froggatt; Steve Iliffe; Jill Manthorpe; Heather Gage; Stephen Barclay
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 3.234

9.  The value of involving patients and public in health services research and evaluation: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Pooja Saini; Shaima M Hassan; Esmaeil Khedmati Morasae; Mark Goodall; Clarissa Giebel; Saiqa Ahmed; Anna Pearson; Lesley M Harper; Jane Cloke; Jenny Irvine; Mark Gabbay
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2021-06-29

10.  Service users as collaborators in mental health research: less stick, more carrot.

Authors:  K Staley; T Kabir; G Szmukler
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 7.723

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.