Literature DB >> 35111882

Monitoring and Evaluation of Patient Engagement in Health Product Research and Development: Co-Creating a Framework for Community Advisory Boards.

Sevgi E Fruytier1, Lidewij Eva Vat1, Rob Camp2, François Houÿez2, Hilde De Keyser3, Denise Dunne4, Davide Marchi5, Laura McKeaveney6, Richard H Pitt7, Carina A C M Pittens1, Meagan F Vaughn8, Elena Zhuravleva9, Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: While patient engagement is becoming more customary in developing health products, its monitoring and evaluation to understand processes and enhance impact are challenging. This article describes a patient engagement monitoring and evaluation (PEME) framework, co-created and tailored to the context of community advisory boards (CABs) for rare diseases in Europe. It can be used to stimulate learning and evaluate impacts of engagement activities.
METHODS: A participatory approach was used in which data collection and analysis were iterative. The process was based on the principles of interactive learning and action and guided by the PEME framework. Data were collected via document analysis, reflection sessions, a questionnaire, and a workshop.
RESULTS: The tailored framework consists of a theory of change model with metrics explaining how CABs can reach their objectives. Of 61 identified metrics, 17 metrics for monitoring the patient engagement process and short-term outcomes were selected, and a "menu" for evaluating long-term impacts was created. Example metrics include "Industry representatives' understanding of patients' unmet needs;" "Feeling of trust between stakeholders;" and "Feeling of preparedness." "Alignment of research programs with patients' needs" was the highest-ranked metric for long-term impact.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that process and short-term outcome metrics could be standardized across CABs, whereas long-term impact metrics may need to be tailored to the collaboration from a proposed menu. Accordingly, we recommend that others adapt and refine the PEME framework as appropriate. The next steps include implementing and testing the evaluation framework to stimulate learning and share impacts.
© 2022 Aurora Health Care, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  drug development; patient engagement; patient participation; program evaluation; rare diseases

Year:  2022        PMID: 35111882      PMCID: PMC8772604          DOI: 10.17294/2330-0698.1859

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Patient Cent Res Rev        ISSN: 2330-068X


  27 in total

1.  Community advisory boards: their role in AIDS clinical trials. Terry Beirn Community Programs for Clinical Research on AIDS.

Authors:  L E Cox; J R Rouff; K H Svendsen; M Markowitz; D I Abrams
Journal:  Health Soc Work       Date:  1998-11

Review 2.  '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

3.  Tokenism in patient engagement.

Authors:  David L Hahn; Amanda E Hoffmann; Maret Felzien; Joseph W LeMaster; Jinping Xu; Lyle J Fagnan
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 2.267

4.  Evaluation of public involvement in research: time for a major re-think?

Authors:  Natalie Edelman; Duncan Barron
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  2015-10-27

5.  Methods and impact of engagement in research, from theory to practice and back again: early findings from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Authors:  Laura Forsythe; Andrea Heckert; Mary Kay Margolis; Suzanne Schrandt; Lori Frank
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  The prevalence of patient engagement in published trials: a systematic review.

Authors:  Dean Fergusson; Zarah Monfaredi; Kusala Pussegoda; Chantelle Garritty; Anne Lyddiatt; Beverley Shea; Lisa Duffett; Mona Ghannad; Joshua Montroy; M. Hassan Murad; Misty Pratt; Tamara Rader; Risa Shorr; Fatemeh Yazdi
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2018-05-22

7.  Patient and public engagement in research and health system decision making: A systematic review of evaluation tools.

Authors:  Antoine Boivin; Audrey L'Espérance; François-Pierre Gauvin; Vincent Dumez; Ann C Macaulay; Pascale Lehoux; Julia Abelson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  Learning as an outcome of involvement in research: what are the implications for practice, reporting and evaluation?

Authors:  Kristina Staley; Duncan Barron
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2019-03-12

9.  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

10.  Evaluation of patient engagement in medicine development: A multi-stakeholder framework with metrics.

Authors:  Lidewij Eva Vat; Teresa Finlay; Paul Robinson; Giorgio Barbareschi; Mathieu Boudes; Ana Maria Diaz Ponce; Michaela Dinboeck; Lukas Eichmann; Elisa Ferrer; Sevgi E Fruytier; Claudia Hey; Jacqueline E W Broerse; Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 3.377

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.