Literature DB >> 25059530

An analysis of the Research Team-Service User relationship from the Service User perspective: a consideration of 'The Three Rs' (Roles, Relations, and Responsibilities) for healthcare research organisations.

Melanie Jordan1, Emma Rowley2, Richard Morriss3, Nick Manning4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This article debates interview data from service users who engaged with the work of a Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). The evidence base, to date, concerning the nature of CLAHRC work at the frontline (i.e. What is it actually like to do CLAHRC work?) is meagre; thus, this article represents an original contribution to that literature. Further, this article analyses service users' participation in research - as members of the research team - and so contributes to the body of developing literature regarding involvement too.
OBJECTIVE: This article explores the nature of the Research Team-Service User relationship, plus associated roles, relations and responsibilities of collaborative health research.
DESIGN: Qualitative social science research was undertaken in a health-care research organization utilizing interview method and a medical sociology and organizational sociology theoretical framework for analysis. Data utilized originate from a larger evaluation study that focuses on the CLAHRC as an iterative organization and explores members' experiences.
RESULTS: There can be a disparity between initial expectations and actual experiences of involvement for service users. Therefore, as structured via 'The Three Rs' (Roles, Relations and Responsibilities), aspects of the relationship are evaluated (e.g. motivation, altruism, satisfaction, transparency, scope, feedback, communication, time). Regarding the inclusion of service users in health research teams, a careful consideration of 'The Three Rs' is required to ensure expectations match experiences.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  collaborative research team; involvement expectations; organizational learning; roles and responsibilities; service user; team experiences

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25059530      PMCID: PMC5810746          DOI: 10.1111/hex.12243

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


  10 in total

1.  Patients and professionals as research partners: challenges, practicalities, and benefits.

Authors:  Sarah Hewlett; Maarten de Wit; Pam Richards; Enid Quest; Rod Hughes; Turid Heiberg; John Kirwan
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2006-08-15

Review 2.  'Talking the talk or walking the walk?' A bibliometric review of the literature on public involvement in health research published between 1995 and 2009.

Authors:  Jonathan Boote; Ruth Wong; Andrew Booth
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-10-04       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Involvement in research without compromising research quality.

Authors:  Ruth Stewart; Kristin Liabo
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  2012-07-19

4.  Patient involvement in a scientific advisory process: setting the research agenda for medical products.

Authors:  Janneke Elisabeth Elberse; Carina Anna Cornelia Maria Pittens; Tjard de Cock Buning; Jacqueline Elisabeth Willy Broerse
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Participation in breast cancer susceptibility testing protocols: influence of recruitment source, altruism, and family involvement on women's decisions.

Authors:  G Geller; T Doksum; B A Bernhardt; S A Metz
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Collaboration and co-ownership in research: dynamics and dialogues between patient research partners and professional researchers in a research team.

Authors:  Christi J Nierse; Karen Schipper; Ezra van Zadelhoff; Joos van de Griendt; Tineke A Abma
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-02-17       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Exploring knowledge exchange: a useful framework for practice and policy.

Authors:  Vicky Ward; Simon Smith; Allan House; Susan Hamer
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Research into practice: Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Lincolnshire (NDL).

Authors:  Emma Rowley; Richard Morriss; Graeme Currie; Justine Schneider
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2012-05-03       Impact factor: 7.327

9.  Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC).

Authors:  Jo Rycroft-Malone; Joyce E Wilkinson; Christopher R Burton; Gavin Andrews; Steven Ariss; Richard Baker; Sue Dopson; Ian Graham; Gill Harvey; Graham Martin; Brendan G McCormack; Sophie Staniszewska; Carl Thompson
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2011-07-19       Impact factor: 7.327

10.  Hearing the voices of service user researchers in collaborative qualitative data analysis: the case for multiple coding.

Authors:  Angela Sweeney; Kathryn E Greenwood; Sally Williams; Til Wykes; Diana S Rose
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-09-07       Impact factor: 3.377

  10 in total
  6 in total

1.  The role of patient and public involvement leads in facilitating feedback: "invisible work".

Authors:  Elspeth Mathie; Nigel Smeeton; Diane Munday; Graham Rhodes; Helena Wythe; Julia Jones
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2020-07-10

2.  Mandatory implementation of NICE Guidelines for the care of bipolar disorder and other conditions in England and Wales.

Authors:  Richard Morriss
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 8.775

3.  Learning from the emergence of NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs): a systematic review of evaluations.

Authors:  Roman Kislov; Paul M Wilson; Sarah Knowles; Ruth Boaden
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 7.327

4.  'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory.

Authors:  Julia Keenan; Fiona Poland; Jonathan Boote; Amanda Howe; Helena Wythe; Anna Varley; Penny Vicary; Lisa Irvine; Amander Wellings
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: Systematic review and co-design pilot.

Authors:  Trisha Greenhalgh; Lisa Hinton; Teresa Finlay; Alastair Macfarlane; Nick Fahy; Ben Clyde; Alan Chant
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Openness, inclusion and transparency in the practice of public involvement in research: A reflective exercise to develop best practice recommendations.

Authors:  Laura J E Brown; Tommy Dickinson; Stuart Smith; Christine Brown Wilson; Maria Horne; Kate Torkington; Paul Simpson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 3.377

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.