Literature DB >> 17678515

Assessment of the benefits of user involvement in health research from the Warwick Diabetes Care Research User Group: a qualitative case study.

Antje Lindenmeyer1, Hilary Hearnshaw, Jackie Sturt, Ralph Ormerod, Geoff Aitchison.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the benefits of involving health-care users in diabetes research. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: For this qualitative case study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with researchers who had worked extensively with the group. During regular meetings of the Research User Group, members discussed their views of the group's effectiveness as part of the meeting's agenda. Interviews and discussions were transcribed, coded using N-Vivo software and analysed using constant comparative methods.
RESULTS: Involvement of users in research was generally seen as contributing to effective and meaningful research. However, the group should not be considered to be representative of the patient population or participants of future trials. An important contributor to the group's success was its longstanding nature, enabling users to gain more insight into research and form constructive working relationships with researchers. The user-led nature of the group asserted itself, especially, in the language used during group meetings. A partial shift of power from researchers to users was generally acknowledged. Users' main contribution was their practical expertise in living with diabetes, but their involvement also helped researchers to remain connected to the 'real world' in which research would be applied. While the group's work fulfilled established principles of consumer involvement in research, important contributions relying on personal interaction between users and researchers were hard to evaluate by process measures alone.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness of this longstanding, experienced, lay-led research advisory group. Its impact on research stems from the continuing interaction between researchers and users, and the general ethos of learning from each other in an on-going process. Both process measures and qualitative interviews with stakeholders are needed to evaluate the contributions of service users to health research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17678515      PMCID: PMC5060408          DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00451.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  8 in total

Review 1.  Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda.

Authors:  Jonathan Boote; Rosemary Telford; Cindy Cooper
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Consumer involvement in research projects: the activities of research funders.

Authors:  Máire O'Donnell; Vikki Entwistle
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research?

Authors:  J Francisca Caron-Flinterman; Jacqueline E W Broerse; Joske F G Bunders
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-12-21       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey.

Authors:  B Hanley; A Truesdale; A King; D Elbourne; I Chalmers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-03-03

Review 5.  Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient information material.

Authors:  E S Nilsen; H T Myrhaug; M Johansen; S Oliver; A D Oxman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-07-19

6.  What does it mean to involve consumers successfully in NHS research? A consensus study.

Authors:  Rosemary Telford; Jonathan D Boote; Cindy L Cooper
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Patients or partners? Case studies of user involvement in the planning and delivery of adult mental health services in London.

Authors:  Deborah Rutter; Catherine Manley; Tim Weaver; Mike J Crawford; Naomi Fulop
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  The Diabetes Manual trial protocol - a cluster randomized controlled trial of a self-management intervention for type 2 diabetes [ISRCTN06315411].

Authors:  Jackie Sturt; Hilary Hearnshaw; Andrew Farmer; Jeremy Dale; Sandra Eldridge
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2006-07-17       Impact factor: 2.497

  8 in total
  36 in total

1.  What is involvement in research and what does it achieve? Reflections on a pilot study of the personal costs of stroke.

Authors:  Christopher McKevitt; Nina Fudge; Charles Wolfe
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2009-08-19       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.  Patient engagement in pharmacy practice research.

Authors:  Damilola Adesanoye; Lisa Guirguis
Journal:  Can Pharm J (Ott)       Date:  2017-02-07

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.  Lessons learned from building an infrastructure for community-engaged research.

Authors:  Calpurnyia B Roberts; Ruth Browne; Tracey E Wilson; Kweli Rashied-Henry; Nicole Primus; Raphael Shaw; Humberto Brown; Ferdinand Zizi; Girardin Jean-Louis; Clinton Brown; Yvonne Graham; Marilyn Fraser-White
Journal:  Int Public Health J       Date:  2013

7.  Survey of community engagement in NIH-funded research.

Authors:  Nancy E Hood; Tracy Brewer; Rebecca Jackson; Mary Ellen Wewers
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.689

8.  Wise owls and professors: the role of older researchers in the review of the National Service Framework for Older People.

Authors:  Michelle Cornes; John Peardon; Jill Manthorpe
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 9.  Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework.

Authors:  Nathan D Shippee; Juan Pablo Domecq Garces; Gabriela J Prutsky Lopez; Zhen Wang; Tarig A Elraiyah; Mohammed Nabhan; Juan P Brito; Kasey Boehmer; Rim Hasan; Belal Firwana; Patricia J Erwin; Victor M Montori; M Hassan Murad
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Do not forget the professional--the value of the FIRST model for guiding the structural involvement of patients in rheumatology research.

Authors:  Maarten P T de Wit; Janneke E Elberse; Jacqueline E W Broerse; Tineke A Abma
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-01-31       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.