Emerging Guidelines for Patient Engagement in Research

The Heart Failure Patient Foundation Position Statement on Research and Patient Involvement

BACKGROUND

Heart Failure (HF) is a growing global public health problem affecting approximately 64 million people worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

The Heart Failure Patient Foundation developed a position statement to advocate for adult patients with HF to be an active participant in research and for HF leaders to integrate patients throughout the research process.

METHODS

A review of the literature and best practices was conducted. Based on the evidence, the HF Patient Foundation made recommendations regarding the inclusion of adult patients with HF throughout the research process.

RESULTS

Healthcare clinicians, researchers and funding agencies have a role to ensure rigorous quality research is performed and implemented into practice. Inclusion of adult patients with HF throughout the research process can improve the lives of patients and families while advancing HF science.

CONCLUSIONS

The HF Patient Foundation strongly advocates that patients with HF be involved in research from inception of the project through dissemination of findings to improve patient outcomes.

Patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the ICU: A mixed-methods study of patient and family perspectives

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to create a definition of patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding during critical illness as an outcome for a randomized trial.

DESIGN

This was a sequential mixed-methods qualitative-dominant multi-center study with an instrument-building aim. In semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups we elicited views from survivors of critical illness and family members of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) regarding which features indicate important gastrointestinal bleeding. Quantitative demographic characteristics were collected. We analyzed qualitative data using inductive content analysis to develop a definition for patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

SETTING

Canada and the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

51 ICU survivors and family members of ICU patients.

RESULTS

Participants considered gastrointestinal bleeding to be important if it resulted in death, disability, or prolonged hospitalization. The following also signaled patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding: blood transfusion, vasopressors, endoscopy, CT-angiography, or surgery. Whether an intervention evinced concern depended on its effectiveness, side-effects, invasiveness and accessibility; contextual influences included participant familiarity and knowledge of interventions and trust in the clinical team.

CONCLUSIONS

Survivors of critical illness and family members described patient-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding differently than current definitions of clinically-important upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Development and validation of the HDSIM™ assessment system: a measure of hemorrhoid disease symptom impact

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhoid disease (HD) affects 10 million people in the US at any given time, and 50% of the US population will develop symptomatic hemorrhoids during their lifetime. Approximately 60% of people with hemorrhoids experience symptoms. Despite its prevalence and impact on quality of life, the existing patient-reported outcome measures of HD have not been validated using standard psychometric methods. The present study thus aimed to develop the Hemorrhoid Disease Symptom Impact Measure™ (HDSIM™) assessment system, a patient-reported measure of HD symptoms and impact for use in HD clinical research.

METHODS

On the basis of results from qualitative cognitive interviews, we generated the conceptual model and item pool. A cross-sectional web-based survey (n = 1066) was done, including a randomly selected retest subsample (n = 100) 1-2 weeks later. The survey sample was selected to be evenly distributed across mild, moderate, and severe levels of disease and to be nationally representative of the general United States population in terms of race, gender, and region. Existing disease-specific measures of symptoms and generic measures of quality of life and well-being were compared to the new tool for construct validation.

RESULTS

The HDSIM system includes 38 items representing six conceptual-model-driven subscales, aligning with the conceptual model: Symptoms at Worst, Symptoms at Best, Bowel Health Impact, Life Impact, Mental Health Impact, and Manageability. Psychometric analyses documented that the subscales had excellent internal consistency reliability, cross-sectional construct validity (i.e., convergent and divergent validity, known groups validity), test-retest stability, and longitudinal construct validity (i.e., responsiveness).

CONCLUSION

The HDSIM system is fit for purpose in hemorrhoid disease clinical trials research. Since measures are validated in an iterative manner over many studies and over time, the present study results should be considered preliminary.

Framework of the Strengths and Challenges of Clinically Integrated Trials: An Expert Panel Report

The limitations of the explanatory clinical trial framework include the high expense of implementing explanatory trials, restrictive entry criteria for participants, and redundant logistical processes. These limitations can result in slow evidence generation that is not responsive to population health needs, yielding evidence that is not generalizable. Clinically integrated trials, which integrate clinical research into routine care, represent a potential solution to this challenge and an opportunity to support learning health systems. The operational and design features of clinically integrated trials include a focused scope, simplicity in design and requirements, the leveraging of existing data structures, and patient participation in the entire trial process. These features are designed to minimize barriers to participation and trial execution and reduce additional research burdens for participants and clinicians alike. Broad adoption and scalability of clinically integrated trials are dependent, in part, on continuing regulatory, healthcare system, and payer support. This analysis presents a framework of the strengths and challenges of clinically integrated trials and is based on a multidisciplinary expert "Think Tank" panel discussion that included representatives from patient populations, academia, non-profit funding agencies, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and industry.

Assessing the Feasibility and Preliminary Effects of a Web-Based Self-Management Program for Chronic Noncancer Pain: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

In Canada, adults with chronic noncancer pain face a persistent insufficiency of publicly funded resources, with the gold standard multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities unable to meet the high clinical demand. Web-based self-management programs cost-effectively increase access to pain management and can improve several aspects of physical and emotional functioning. Aiming to meet the demand for accessible, fully automated resources for individuals with chronic noncancer pain, we developed a French web- and evidence-based self-management program, Agir pour moi (APM). This program includes pain education and strategies to reduce stress, practice mindfulness, apply pacing, engage in physical activity, identify and manage thinking traps, sleep better, adapt diet, and sustain behavior change.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the APM self-management program's feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effects in adults awaiting specialized services from a center of expertise in chronic pain management.

METHODS

We conducted a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequential design, including a web-based 1-arm trial and qualitative semistructured interviews. We present the results from both phases through integrative tables called joint displays.

RESULTS

Response rates were 70% (44/63) at postintervention and 56% (35/63) at 3-month follow-up among the 63 consenting participants who provided self-assessed information at baseline. In total, 46% (29/63) of the participants completed the program. We interviewed 24% (15/63) of the participants. The interview's first theme revolved around the overall acceptance, user-friendliness, and engaging nature of the program. The second theme emphasized the differentiation between microlevel and macrolevel engagements. The third theme delved into the diverse effects observed, potentially influenced by the macrolevel engagements. Participants highlighted the features that impacted their self-efficacy and the adoption of self-management strategies. We observed indications of improvement in self-efficacy, pain intensity, pain interference, depression, and catastrophizing. Interviewees described these and various other effects as potentially influenced by macrolevel engagement through behavioral change.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provided preliminary evidence that the APM self-management program and research methods are feasible. However, some participants expressed the need for at least phone reminders and minimal support from a professional available to answer questions over the first few weeks of the program to engage. Recruitment strategies of a future randomized controlled trial should focus on attracting a broader representation of individuals with chronic pain in terms of gender and ethnicity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05319652; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05319652.

Patient engagement in designing, conducting, and disseminating clinical pain research: IMMPACT recommended considerations

ABSTRACT

In the traditional clinical research model, patients are typically involved only as participants. However, there has been a shift in recent years highlighting the value and contributions that patients bring as members of the research team, across the clinical research lifecycle. It is becoming increasingly evident that to develop research that is both meaningful to people who have the targeted condition and is feasible, there are important benefits of involving patients in the planning, conduct, and dissemination of research from its earliest stages. In fact, research funders and regulatory agencies are now explicitly encouraging, and sometimes requiring, that patients are engaged as partners in research. Although this approach has become commonplace in some fields of clinical research, it remains the exception in clinical pain research. As such, the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials convened a meeting with patient partners and international representatives from academia, patient advocacy groups, government regulatory agencies, research funding organizations, academic journals, and the biopharmaceutical industry to develop consensus recommendations for advancing patient engagement in all stages of clinical pain research in an effective and purposeful manner. This article summarizes the results of this meeting and offers considerations for meaningful and authentic engagement of patient partners in clinical pain research, including recommendations for representation, timing, continuous engagement, measurement, reporting, and research dissemination.

Determining the destination: a co-designed chronic advanced cancer rehabilitation conceptual framework for engagement of individuals with lived experience in rehabilitation research

BACKGROUND

Individuals living with chronic advanced cancer (CAC) often face distinct physical, functional, and cognitive issues. Their rehabilitation needs are not yet routinely met, warranting further CAC-specific rehabilitation-based research. Given the complexity of functional and symptom presentations, engagement of individuals living with CAC as partners in the research process is encouraged to better understand the lived perspective. Formal engagement requires both structured approaches and iterative processes. The aim was to co-design a conceptual framework to develop and integrate engagement strategies into rehabilitation research focused on CAC populations.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary team of authors, including two individuals with lived experience, conducted an implementation-focused descriptive study to inform future research design, including: interviews and follow-up, review of current models and approaches, and development of a co-designed conceptual framework for engaging individuals with lived experience into CAC-specific rehabilitation research.

RESULTS

Emergent themes include shared understanding, transparent appreciation, iterative processes and unique partnership needs. A definition, guiding principles and tools for engagement were identified. In consultation with individuals with lived experience, and application of the emergent themes in context, a conceptual framework to guide the engagement process was developed.

CONCLUSION

A novel conceptual framework for engaging individuals with lived experience with CAC as partners in rehabilitation research is proposed to facilitate implementation-focused team-based approaches for this population.

Studying How Patient Engagement Influences Research: A Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

There is evidence supporting the value of patient engagement (PE) in research to patients and researchers. However, there is little research evidence on the influence of PE throughout the entire research process as well as the outcomes of research engagement. The purpose of our study is to add to this evidence.

METHODS

We used a convergent mixed method design to guide the integration of our survey data and observation data to assess the influence of PE in two groups, comprising patient research partners (PRPs), clinicians, and researchers. A PRP led one group (PLG) and an academic researcher led the other (RLG). Both groups were given the same research question and tasked to design and conduct an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-related patient preference study. We administered validated evaluation tools at three points and observed PE in the two groups conducting the IBD study.

RESULTS

PRPs in both groups took on many operational roles and influenced all stages of the IBD-related qualitative study: launch, design, implementation, and knowledge translation. PRPs provided more clarity on the study design, target population, inclusion-exclusion criteria, data collection approach, and the results. PRPs helped operationalize the project question, develop study material and data collection instruments, collect data, and present the data in a relevant and understandable manner to the patient community. The synergy of collaborative partnership resulted in two projects that were patient-centered, meaningful, understandable, legitimate, rigorous, adaptable, feasible, ethical and transparent, timely, and sustainable.

CONCLUSION

Collaborative and meaningful engagement of patients and researchers can influence all stages of qualitative research including design and approach, and outputs.

Treating Tourette Together: An Agenda for Patient-Centered Research Focused on Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics

To establish a patient-centered agenda for research that will lead to effective, widespread availability, adoption, and utilization of evidence-based behavioral treatment of Tourette syndrome and other tic disorders (TDs), we planned and executed a multistage, collaborative "Treating Tourette Together" research planning project with researchers, clinicians, patients, families, and other interested parties. Priorities for future behavioral treatment research were solicited from these parties via anonymous community surveys, a 2-day research planning summit with 46 individuals representing key stakeholder groups, and community response to summit reports. Four high-priority research domains were identified: (a) expanding treatment access, (b) improving treatment outcomes, (c) optimizing treatment within a broader care model, and (d) evaluating outcomes beyond tic severity. Community-engaged participatory research models can efficiently delineate clear and actionable priorities for clinical research. This approach holds promise for improving the impact of clinical research in TDs and other neuropsychiatric disorders.

Reporting of equity in observational epidemiology: A methodological review

Background

Observational studies can inform how we understand and address persisting health inequities through the collection, reporting and analysis of health equity factors. However, the extent to which the analysis and reporting of equity-relevant aspects in observational research are generally unknown. Thus, we aimed to systematically evaluate how equity-relevant observational studies reported equity considerations in the study design and analyses.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE for health equity-relevant observational studies from January 2020 to March 2022, resulting in 16 828 articles. We randomly selected 320 studies, ensuring a balance in focus on populations experiencing inequities, country income settings, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) topic. We extracted information on study design and analysis methods.

Results

The bulk of the studies were conducted in North America (n = 95, 30%), followed by Europe and Central Asia (n = 55, 17%). Half of the studies (n = 171, 53%) addressed general health and well-being, while 49 (15%) focused on mental health conditions. Two-thirds of the studies (n = 220, 69%) were cross-sectional. Eight (3%) engaged with populations experiencing inequities, while 22 (29%) adapted recruitment methods to reach these populations. Further, 67 studies (21%) examined interaction effects primarily related to race or ethnicity (48%). Two-thirds of the studies (72%) adjusted for characteristics associated with inequities, and 18 studies (6%) used flow diagrams to depict how populations experiencing inequities progressed throughout the studies.

Conclusions

Despite over 80% of the equity-focused observational studies providing a rationale for a focus on health equity, reporting of study design features relevant to health equity ranged from 0-95%, with over half of the items reported by less than one-quarter of studies. This methodological study is a baseline assessment to inform the development of an equity-focussed reporting guideline for observational studies as an extension of the well-known Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline.

How the expert nursing role was used to facilitate the co-design of a patient interview study

BACKGROUND

Co-design is a research method that seeks to engage service users in research. The approach fosters inclusivity and shared power by having researchers and research participants work together for some or all of a study.

AIM

To describe the experience of co-designing a patient interview study from the perspective of an expert stoma nurse, using a case-study approach and reflexive methods.

DISCUSSION

Valuing expert patients' experiences when conducting research about them enabled patients to be trained as participant researchers to co-design and undertake a patient interview study. The co-design process enabled the researcher to develop a greater recognition of the fact that experience of looking after people with stomas does not equate to expertise in knowing what it is like to have a stoma. This enriched her research experience and increased the authenticity of the study.

CONCLUSION

Co-designing a study with service users creates challenges for nurse researchers. They must pay attention to relational changes, time, planning and organisation to ensure that they conduct their research rigorously and ethically, and safeguard the co-researchers and other participants from potential risks.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Co-designing research is critical for developing effective, patient-centred bodies of evidence. Nurse researchers can play a critical role but must be prepared to shift from directive to participatory methods to identify appropriate, patient-focused improvements.

Navigating meaningful engagement: lessons from partnering with youth and families in brain-based disability research

BACKGROUND

While patient and family engagement in research has become a widespread practice, meaningful and authentic engagement remains a challenge. In the READYorNot™ Brain-Based Disabilities Study, we developed the MyREADY Transition™ Brain-Based Disabilities App to promote education, empowerment, and navigation for the transition from pediatric to adult care among youth with brain-based disabilities, aged 15-17 years old. Our research team created a Patient and Family Advisory Council (PFAC) to engage adolescents, young adults, and parent caregivers as partners throughout our multi-year and multi-stage project.

MAIN BODY

This commentary, initiated and co-authored by members of our PFAC, researchers, staff, and a trainee, describes how we corrected the course of our partnership in response to critical feedback from partners. We begin by highlighting an email testimonial from a young adult PFAC member, which constituted a "critical turning point," that unveiled feelings of unclear expectations, lack of appreciation, and imbalanced relationships among PFAC members. As a team, we reflected on our partnership experiences and reviewed documentation of PFAC activities. This process allowed us to set three intentions to create a collective goal of authentic and meaningful engagement and to chart the course to get us there: (1) offering clarity and flexibility around participation; (2) valuing and acknowledging partners and their contributions; and (3) providing choice and leveraging individual interests and strengths. Our key recommendations include: (1) charting the course with a plan to guide our work; (2) learning the ropes by developing capacity for patient-oriented research; (3) all hands on deck by building a community of engagement; and (4) making course corrections and being prepared to weather the storms by remaining open to reflection, re-evaluation, and adjustment as necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

We share key recommendations and lessons learned from our experiences alongside examples from the literature to offer guidance for multi-stage research projects partnering with adolescents, young adults, and family partners. We hope that by sharing challenges and lessons learned, we can help advance patient and family engagement in research.

Community- and Patient-Partner Engagement in Women's Cardiovascular Disease Research: A Rapid Review of the Evidence

The primary objective of this rapid review is to describe community-partner and patient-partner engagement in women's cardiovascular disease (CVD) research. Secondary objectives are to: (i) describe the phase of the research in which community and patient partners were engaged; (ii) define the level of engagement at each research phase; and (iii) make recommendations for future engagement of community and/or patient partners in women's CVD research. Rapid review guidelines recommended by the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group and Tricco et al. were used to search 5 databases using medical subject headings (MeSH) and/or keywords. Participants included women (cis and trans) aged > 18 years who had ischemic heart disease, heart failure, or stroke. A risk of bias assessment was not undertaken. Findings are summarized and/or clustered as community-based participatory research, or patient-oriented and/or patient-partner research. Our search yielded 39,998 titles and abstracts. Of these, 35 were included in a final narrative synthesis, comprising data from 474 community and/or patient partners, including 417 (88%) women. Over 85% of community partners collaborated in the design and/or planning and implementation of women's CVD research; most originated in the US; only one originated in Canada. Most patient-oriented and patient-partner research originated in Canada. However, less than 50% of patient partners collaborated in any phase of research. Sex, gender, race, and ethnicity were rarely reported. Results suggest negligible community and inadequate patient-oriented and/or patient-partner engagement in women's CVD research in Canada. Improved CVD outcomes for women may be achieved with better community- and patient-partner collaboration across all phases of research, genders, race, and ethnicities.

The power of language: how to bridge the gap between healthcare research and patients - a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The value of patient involvement to the design, conduct, and outcomes of healthcare research is increasingly being recognized. Patient involvement also provides greater patient accessibility and contribution to research. However, the use of inaccessible and technical language when communicating with patients is a barrier to effective patient involvement.

METHODS

We analyzed peer-reviewed and gray literature on how language is used in communication between healthcare researchers and patients. We used this analysis to generate a set of recommendations for healthcare researchers about using more inclusive and accessible language when involving patients in research. This scoping review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

RESULTS

Four major themes about the use of language were developed from the literature analysis and were used to develop the set of recommendations. These recommendations include guidance on using standardized terminology and plain language when involving patients in healthcare research. They also discuss the implementation of co-development practices, patient support initiatives, and researcher training, as well as ways to improve emotional awareness and the need for greater equality, diversity, and inclusion.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The use of inclusive, empathetic, and clear language can encourage patients to be involved in research and, once they are involved, make them feel like equal, empowered, and valued partners. Working toward developing processes and guidelines for the use of language that enables an equal partnership between researchers and patients is critical.

Cultural health capital and patient partner recruitment into healthcare improvement work

A rising emphasis on patient involvement in clinical research and healthcare improvement has led to the steady incorporation of patients and caregivers into this work. However, interactional factors shaping recruitment processes are not well understood. In this paper, we present a qualitative analysis of interviews with twenty-six patients, family members, engagement staff and healthcare providers who are engaged in healthcare improvement work in the United States. We focus on how stakeholders account for recruitment decisions to participate in healthcare improvement work. We find that expressions of and judgments about patients' and caregivers' cultural health capital shape providers' decisions to extend invitations to participate in healthcare improvement work. These findings extend current conceptualizations of cultural health capital beyond the clinical encounter to reveal factors shaping patient recruitment into healthcare improvement work. In theorizing how cultural health capital shapes action in this new setting, we found that healthcare providers, engagement staff, and patients/caregivers attended to different aspects of cultural health capital when accounting for why they extended or received a recruitment pitch. We further found that participating in healthcare improvement work led to a boost in cultural health capital for patients and caregivers, which they could use to develop transmissible forms of cultural health capital for less centrally involved patients and caregivers. Finally, we describe how participants in healthcare improvement collaboratives account for a lack of diversity among partners. These findings help us hypothesize the consequences of recruitment processes that rely on displays and judgments of cultural health capital and identify possibilities for change. Using the case of healthcare improvement work in Collaborative Learning Health Systems, our findings advance past work on cultural health capital in medical sociology by theorizing the role of cultural health capital in recruitment processes.

AYA-UNITE: Lessons Learned on Intervention Development Promoting Social and Physical Health of Adolescent/Young Adult Cancer Survivors

Adolescent/young adult cancer survivors (AYACS) struggle with poor psychosocial health related to social disruptions due to cancer diagnosis, impacting long-term goal achievement and overall health. In particular, social health promotion is overlooked in AYACS' care. AYA-UNITE, a sociobehavioral exercise intervention pilot for AYACS 15-21 years of age at cancer diagnosis, was designed to foster AYACS' social and physical health. AYA-UNITE was a 12-week group-based virtual exercise program incorporating strength training and aerobic activity. In this brief report, we account AYA-UNITE's conceptual design, lessons learned through AYA-UNITE intervention development, and opportunities for improvement in implementing effective AYACS psychosocial interventions (NCT03778658).

Patient involvement in research within the Gynecological Cancer InterGroup: A call to action for a systematic approach: Results from a survey

Background and Aims

Involving patients in research, not only as trial subjects, is not a newly established practice. Over the last two decades, patient roles have gradually expanded to become active research contributors, creating a more patient-centered research landscape. Our survey has explored the scope of patient involvement within the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG), an International Gynecologic Cancer Research Consortium, and identified challenges in developing a systematic, meaningful and sustainable level of patient involvement.

Methods

In late 2019, the GCIG Harmonisation Operations Committee conducted an online survey across 26 national and/or international research cooperative groups, aiming to identify current patient involvement practices implemented by each group. Twelve questions were asked. The results have been generated to support a systematic strategic planning process to increase patient involvement into clinical research projects.

Results

More than half of the 26 participating groups have either already involved (15, [58%]) or are planning (6, [23%]) to involve patients in their research activities. Gaining patient support in raising public awareness around clinical trials appears to be one of the most desired benefits (21, [81%]). Ten respondents managed to integrate patient involvement into their standard practice. When involving patients in research the groups mostly consider that patients bring added value to the study (19, [73%]), although only eight groups (40%) have a well-organized process in doing so.

Conclusion

Even though patient involvement is considered a significant added value to clinical research, its application within GCIG groups is not considered on a regular basis and is predominantly limited to operational aspects of research activities. The lack of resources and expertize, as well as the missing well-organized and structured process of some groups, combined with their ability to ensure process sustainability, are among the main factors affecting implementation and adoption of patient involvement within GCIG research activities.

The INSIGHT project: reflections on the co-production of a quality recognition programme to showcase excellence in public involvement in health and care research

BACKGROUND

The quality of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in healthcare research varies considerably and is frequently tokenistic. We aimed to co-produce the Insight | Public Involvement Quality Recognition and Awards programme, based on the UK Standards for Public Involvement (UKSPI) alongside an incremental scale designed by Expert Citizens (a lived experience-led community group), to incentivise and celebrate continuous improvement in PPI.

METHODS

We used Task and Finish Groups (19/44 [43%] public contributor membership) to co-produce the programme which we piloted in three organisations with different healthcare research models. We used surveys and review sessions to capture learning and reflections.

RESULTS

We co-created: (1) A Quality descriptor matrix comprising four incremental quality levels (Welcoming, Listening, Learning, Leading) for each UKSPI standard. (2) An assessment framework including guidance materials, self-assessment form and final report template. (3) An assessor training package. (4) The quality awards event format and nomination form. These materials were modified based on pilot-site feedback. Of survey respondents: 94.4% felt they had made at least 'Some' personal contribution (half said 'Quite a lot'/'A great deal'), 88.9% said they were 'Always'/'Often' able to express their views freely and, 100% stated the programme would have 'A lot of impact'/'Quite a bit of impact'. During the project, we identified the importance of taking time to explain project aims and contributor roles, adapting to the needs of individual contributors and, using smaller bespoke sessions outside the main Task and Finish Groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We co-produced and piloted a quality recognition programme to incentivise and celebrate continuous quality improvement in PPI. One public contributor stated, "I feel strongly that the Insight framework and awards will raise awareness of the [public involvement] work going on in many community settings. [It] is likely to result in better sharing of positive practice, incentivising research groups of any size to start work or to improve the quality of [PPI] could be one of the main benefits. I'm excited that if this initiative takes off, regionally and then in the longer term nationally, it could be a significant step in advancing the [public] voice."

The value of co-creating a clinical outcome assessment strategy for clinical trial research: process and lessons learnt

BACKGROUND

In support of UCB pharmaceutical research programs, the aim of this research was to implement a novel process for patient involvement in a multidisciplinary research group to co-create a clinical outcome assessment strategy to accurately reflect the experience of people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were an integral part of the decision-making process for patient-reported outcome (PRO) research and instrument development.

METHODS

In partnership with two patient organizations (Parkinson's UK and the Parkinson's Foundation), 6 patient experts were recruited into a multidisciplinary research group alongside clinical, patient engagement and involvement, regulatory science, and outcome measurement experts. The group was involved across two phases of research; the first phase identified what symptoms are cardinal to the experience of living with early-stage Parkinson's and the second phase involved the development of PRO instruments to better assess the symptoms that are important to people living with early-stage Parkinson's. Patient experts were important in performing a variety of roles, in particular, qualitative study protocol design, conceptual model development, and subsequent co-creation of two PRO instruments.

RESULTS

Involving people with Parkinson's in PRO research ensured that the expertise of these representatives from the Parkinson's community shaped and drove the research; as such, PRO instruments were being developed with the patient at the forefront. Working with patient experts required considerable resource and time allocation for planning, communication, document development, and organizing meetings; however, their input enriched the development of PRO instruments and was vital in developing PRO instruments that are more meaningful for people with Parkinson's and clinicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Conducting PRO research, in the context of clinical development involving pharmaceutical companies, requires balancing regulatory and scientific rigor with tight time constraints. Incorporating a multi-stakeholder perspective, which included patient experts as joint investigators, had a strong positive impact on our research, despite the logistical complexities of their involvement. Due to the input of patient experts, the innovative clinical outcome assessment strategy and the co-created novel PRO instruments were more relevant and holistic to the patient experience of early-stage Parkinson's.

Attitude and perception toward clinical trials in India among patients and patient bystanders visiting the Indian Ophthalmology Clinical Trial Network: A multi-centric, cross-sectional survey

Purpose

Advances in patient treatment depend heavily on clinical trials (CTs). Patient volunteers for CT are tougher to recruit and retain. In order to administer CTs effectively, it is necessary to comprehend how the public views and perceives participating in them. The study assessed the perception and attitudes of patients and bystanders toward CTs in India.

Methods

This was a multi-centric, cross-sectional study among patients and bystanders using a questionnaire that consisted of socio-demographic characteristics and questions on knowledge and attitude toward participation in CTs. The minimum sample size estimated for the survey was 750.

Results

A total of 1260 respondents (patients and bystanders) had participated in the survey. 42% of total respondents were aware about CTs. Unawareness regarding (i) voluntary power of an individual to participate in a CT (only 47%), (ii) entitled benefits of free treatment and medical insurance during enrolment in a CT (only 47%), and (iii) only 16% of the respondents knew involvement of human subjects in CT were the major highlights among those who had prior knowledge about CTs. Education was the most pervasive factor in shaping positive perception among the respondents. Occupation was another ubiquitous factor in shaping their perception regarding CTs.

Conclusion

The majority of respondents were not aware of CTs. The major concerns observed were time consumption and harmful nature of CTs that influenced their unwillingness to participate in CTs. Initiatives such as awareness campaigns and survey assessments that would result in scientifically effective health service policies would be strategic methods to enhance CT participation.

Recognizing patient partner contributions to health research: a systematic review of reported practices

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in research refers to collaboration between researchers and patients (i.e., individuals with lived experience including informal caregivers) in developing or conducting research. Offering non-financial (e.g., co-authorship, gift) or financial (e.g., honoraria, salary) compensation to patient partners can demonstrate appreciation for patient partner time and effort. However, little is known about how patient partners are currently compensated for their engagement in research. We sought to assess the prevalence of reporting patient partner compensation, specific compensation practices (non-financial and financial) reported, and identify benefits, challenges, barriers and enablers to offering financial compensation.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies citing the Guidance for Reporting the Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP I and II) reporting checklists (October 2021) within Web of Science and Scopus. Studies that engaged patients as research partners were eligible. Two independent reviewers screened full texts and extracted data from included studies using a standardized data abstraction form. Data pertaining to compensation methods (financial and non-financial) and reported barriers and enablers to financially compensating patient partners were extracted. No formal quality assessment was conducted since the aim of the review is to describe the scope of patient partner compensation. Quantitative data were presented descriptively, and qualitative data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

The search identified 843 studies of which 316 studies were eligible. Of the 316 studies, 91% (n = 288) reported offering a type of compensation to patient partners. The most common method of non-financial compensation reported was informal acknowledgement on research outputs (65%, n = 206) and co-authorship (49%, n = 156). Seventy-nine studies (25%) reported offering financial compensation (i.e., honoraria, salary), 32 (10%) reported offering no financial compensation, and 205 (65%) studies did not report on financial compensation. Two key barriers were lack of funding to support compensation and absence of institutional policy or guidance. Two frequently reported enablers were considering financial compensation when developing the project budget and adequate project funding.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of published studies reporting patient engagement in research, most offered non-financial methods of compensation to patient partners. Researchers may need guidance and support to overcome barriers to offering financial compensation.

"I think there has to be a mutual respect for there to be value": Evaluating patient engagement in a national clinical trial on de-implementation of low value care

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of patient engagement in research is understudied and under-reported, making it difficult to know what engagement strategies work best and when. We provide the results of an evaluation of patient engagement in a large Canadian research program focused on the de-implementation of low-value care. We aimed to evaluate the experience and impact of patient engagement in the study.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey was administered using Microsoft Forms to (1) researchers and study staff and (2) patient partners. The survey was developed following iterative reviews by the project's patient partnership council and evaluation committee. Survey content areas included opinions on patient engagement to date, including challenges to engagement and suggestions for improvement. Patient partners also evaluated the partnership council. Descriptive statistics including counts and percentages described Likert scale survey items, while open comments were analyzed using descriptive content analysis.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 46% (17/37). There were positive attitudes about the value of patient engagement in this project. There was also a high degree of willingness to be involved with patient engagement in future projects, whether as a patient partner or as a researcher including patients on the research team. Most patient partners felt their contributions to the project were valued by researchers and study research staff. Open comments revealed that a co-design approach and full inclusion on the research team were integral to demonstrating the value of patient partner input. Areas for improvement included more frequent and ongoing communication among all team members, as well as earlier training about patient engagement, particularly addressing role expectations and role clarity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data revealed that despite some challenges, team members recognized the value of patient engagement in research and agreed project decisions had been impacted by patient partner input. Ongoing communication was highlighted as an area for improvement, as well as earlier training and ongoing support for all team members, but particularly researchers and study staff. In response to evaluation data, the team has reinstated a quarterly newsletter and plans to use specific patient engagement planning templates across study sites for all project activities. These tools should help make expectations clear for all team members and contribute to a positive patient engagement experience. Findings can inform patient engagement planning and evaluation for other health research projects.

Roadmap to engagement: Bringing patient partners into cancer research and beyond

The University of Kansas Cancer Center (KU Cancer Center) initiated an engagement program to leverage the lived experience of individuals and families with cancer. KU Cancer Center faculty, staff, and patient partners built an infrastructure to achieve a patient-designed, patient-led, and research-informed engagement program called Patient and Investigator Voices Organizing Together (PIVOT). This special communication offers an engagement roadmap that can be replicated, scaled, and adopted at other cancer centers and academic health systems. PIVOT demonstrates that collaboration among academic leaders, investigators, and people with a lived experience yields a patient-centered, vibrant environment that enriches the research enterprise.

Engaging Patients and Other Stakeholders in "Designing for Dissemination" of Record Linkage Methods and Tools

BACKGROUND

Novel record linkage (RL) methods have the potential to enhance clinical informatics by integrating patient data from multiple sources-including electronic health records, insurance claims, and digital health devices-to inform patient-centered care. Engaging patients and other stakeholders in the use of RL methods in patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) is a key step in ensuring RL methods are viewed as acceptable, appropriate, and useful. The University of Colorado Record Linkage (CURL) platform empowers the use of RL in PCOR.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe the process of engaging patients and other stakeholders in the design of an RL dissemination package to support the use of RL methods in PCOR.

METHODS

Customer discovery, value proposition design, and user experience methods were used to iteratively develop an RL dissemination package that includes animated explainer videos for patients and an RL research planning workbook for researchers. Patients and other stakeholders (researchers, data managers, and regulatory officials) were engaged in the RL dissemination package design.

RESULTS

Patient partners emphasized the importance of conveying how RL methods may benefit patients and the rules researchers must follow to protect the privacy and security of patient data. Other stakeholders described accuracy, flexibility, efficiency, and data security compared with other available RL solutions. Dissemination package communication products reflect the value propositions identified by key stakeholders. As prioritized by patients, the animated explainer videos emphasize the data privacy and security processes and procedures employed when performing research using RL. The RL workbook addresses researchers' and data managers' needs to iteratively design RL projects and provides accompanying resources to alleviate leadership and regulatory officials' concerns about data regulation compliance.

CONCLUSION

Dissemination products to promote adoption and use of CURL include materials to facilitate patient engagement in RL research and investigator step-by-step decision-making materials about the integration of RL methods in PCOR.

Delivery and evaluation of simulations to promote authentic and meaningful engagement in childhood disability research

BACKGROUND

In 2019, our interdisciplinary team of researchers, family members, and youth co-designed four simulation training videos and accompanying facilitation resources to prepare youth, family members, trainees, and researchers to build the knowledge and skills to engage in patient-oriented research (POR) authentically and meaningfully. Videos covered challenges in aspects of the research process including (1) forming a project team; (2) identifying project objectives and priorities; (3) agreeing on results; and (4) carrying out knowledge translation.

METHODS

The purpose of the study was to deliver four simulation training videos across 2 two-hour facilitated workshops with researchers, trainees, and family partners. We evaluated whether the training videos and facilitated discussion of the simulations helped to improve knowledge and attitudes about authentic and meaningful partnership in research and self-perceived ability to engage in POR. An explanatory sequential two-phase mixed methods design was used. Phase 1 (quantitative) included two training workshops and a pre/post-training survey. Phase 2 (qualitative) included two qualitative focus groups. Results of each phase were analyzed separately and then combined during interpretation.

RESULTS

Sixteen individuals (including researchers/research staff, trainees, family members, clinicians) took part in this research study. Overall, participants were highly receptive to the training, providing high scores on measures of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. While the training videos and facilitated discussion of the simulations were found to increase participants' knowledge and ability to engage in authentic and meaningful POR, we found no significant change in attitude or intent. Recommendations about the simulation content and delivery were provided to inform for future use.

CONCLUSIONS

The simulations were found to be a positive and impactful way for collaborative research teams to build knowledge and ability to engage in authentic and meaningful POR. Recommendations for future work include covering different content areas with varying levels of nuance; and offering the training to stakeholders in a variety of roles, such as those higher-ranked academic positions.

A Foundation for Patient-Centered Core Impact Sets: Key Learnings from Past and Existing Approaches

Despite growing commitment to patient centricity, challenges persist in consistently identifying the impacts of disease and/or treatment that patients report as most important to them, especially across myriad potential downstream uses. Patient-centered core impact sets (PC-CIS), disease-specific lists of impacts that patients report as most important, are proposed as a solution. But, PC-CIS is a new concept, currently in the pilot stage with patient advocacy groups. We conducted an environmental scan to explore PC-CIS conceptual overlap with past/existing efforts [e.g., core outcome sets (COS)] and to inform general feasibility for further development and operationalization. With guidance and advice from an expert advisory committee, we conducted a search of the literature and relevant websites. Identified resources were reviewed for alignment with the PC-CIS definition, and key insights were gleaned. We identified 51 existing resources and five key insights: (1) no existing efforts identified meet the definition of PC-CIS as we have specified it in terms of patient centricity, (2) existing COS-development efforts are a valuable source of foundational resources for PC-CIS, (3) existing health-outcome taxonomies can be augmented with patient-prioritized impacts to create a comprehensive impact taxonomy, (4) current approaches/methods can inadvertently exclude patient priorities from core lists/sets and will need to be modified to protect the patient voice, and (5) there is need for clarity and transparency on how patients were engaged in individual past/existing efforts. PC-CIS is conceptually unique from past/existing efforts in its explicit emphasis on patient leadership and being patient driven. However, PC-CIS development can leverage many resources from the past/existing related work.

Research and Innovation in Organ Donation: Recommendations From an International Consensus Forum

This report provides recommendations from the Research and Innovation domain as part of the International Donation and Transplantation Legislative and Policy Forum (hereafter the Forum) to provide expert guidance on the structure of an ideal organ and tissue donation and transplantation system. The recommendations focus on deceased donation research and are intended for clinicians, investigators, decision-makers, and patient, family, and donor (PFD) partners involved in the field.

Methods

We identified topics impacting donation research through consensus using nominal group technique. Members performed narrative reviews and synthesized current knowledge on each topic, which included academic articles, policy documents, and gray literature. Using the nominal group technique, committee members discussed significant findings, which provided evidence for our recommendations. The Forum's scientific committee then vetted recommendations.

Results

We developed 16 recommendations in 3 key areas to provide stakeholders guidance in developing a robust deceased donor research framework. These include PFD and public involvement in research; donor, surrogate, and recipient consent within a research ethics framework; and data management. We highlight the importance of PFD and public partner involvement in research, we define the minimum ethical requirements for the protection of donors and recipients of both target and nontarget organ recipients, and we recommend the creation of a centrally administered donor research oversight committee, a single specialist institutional review board, and a research oversight body to facilitate coordination and ethical oversight of organ donor intervention research.

Conclusions

Our recommendations provide a roadmap for developing and implementing an ethical deceased donation research framework that continually builds public trust. Although these recommendations can be applied to jurisdictions developing or reforming their organ and tissue donation and transplantation system, stakeholders are encouraged to collaborate and respond to their specific jurisdictional needs related to organ and tissue shortages.

Scoping review of methods for engaging long-term care residents living with dementia in research and guideline development

OBJECTIVES

To describe: (1) methods used to engage long-term care (LTC) residents living with dementia in research and guideline development; (2) the outcomes of engagement; and (3) barriers and facilitators to engagement.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted searches in Academic Search Premier (EBSCO), APA PsychInfo (EBSCO), CINAHL (EBSCO), Medline (OVID), Embase (Elsevier), Web of Science and the Cochrane database, and a structured grey literature search in July 2021 and updated in March 2023. We included studies that described or evaluated resident engagement, defined as including residents living with dementia in the process of developing healthcare guidelines or research which could include collaborators or partners in planning, execution or dissemination of the guideline or research. Title, abstracts and full-texts were screened for eligibility by two team members using a pilot-tested process. Data were extracted from included studies independently and in duplicate by two team members using a pre-tested data extraction form. Results were narratively synthesised according to the research question they addressed.

RESULTS

We identified three studies for inclusion. Residents were engaged at the beginning of the research projects through interviews, focus groups, and consultations. None of the included articles described the outcomes of engagement. Barriers to engagement were predominantly at the resident level, including impaired verbal communication limiting resident's abilities to participate in discussions, while increased time to support engagement was reported as a barrier at the resident and research team levels.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a small body of literature describing the engagement of LTC residents in health research and guideline development. Future work should explore alternative methods to engage LTC residents living with dementia, including art-based methods, and the effect of including resident engagement. Guideline developers and researchers should ensure adequate time and human resources are allocated to support engagement.

Training and capacity development in patient-oriented research: Ontario SPOR SUPPORT Unit (OSSU) initiatives

BACKGROUND

In Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research launched the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) in 2011. The strategy defines 'patient-oriented research' as a continuum of research that engages patients as partners, focuses on patient priorities, and leads to improved patient outcomes. The overarching term 'patient' is inclusive of individuals with personal experience of a health issue as well as informal caregivers including family and friends. The vision for the strategy is improved patient experiences and outcomes through the integration of patient-oriented research findings into practice, policy, and health system improvement. Building capacity in patient-oriented research among all relevant stakeholders, namely patients, practitioners, organizational leaders, policymakers, researchers, and research funders is a core element of the strategy.

MAIN BODY

The objective of this paper is to describe capacity building initiatives in patient-oriented research led by the Ontario SPOR SUPPORT Unit in Ontario, Canada over the period 2014-2020.

CONCLUSION

The Ontario SPOR SUPPORT Unit Working Group in Training and Capacity Development has led numerous capacity building initiatives: developed a Capacity Building Compendium (accessed greater than 45,000 times); hosted Masterclasses that have trained hundreds of stakeholders (patients, practitioners, organizational leaders, policymakers, researchers, and trainees) in the conduct and use of patient-oriented research; funded the development of online curricula on patient-oriented research that have reached thousands of stakeholders; developed a patient engagement resource center that has been accessed by tens of thousands of stakeholders; identified core competencies for research teams and research environments to ensure authentic and meaningful patient partnerships in health research; and shared these resources and learnings with stakeholders across Canada, North America, and internationally.

Understanding Transgender and Gender-Diverse Youth's Experiences Receiving Care via Telemedicine: Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Access to virtual care has increased since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, yet little is known about transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) youth's experiences and perspectives on receiving care via telemedicine.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore these experiences to (1) inform necessary changes to the provision of pediatric gender-affirming care and (2) help providers and health systems determine if and how telemedicine should be made available post pandemic.

METHODS

Youth (aged 14-17 years) who completed a telemedicine visit in the Seattle Children's Gender Clinic were invited to participate in a semistructured interview exploring perceived advantages or disadvantages of telemedicine and preferred visit modalities. Interview transcriptions were analyzed by 2 research team members using an inductive thematic analysis framework.

RESULTS

A total of 15 TGD youth completed an interview. Commonly cited advantages of telemedicine were convenience and comfort with having visits in their own environments. Reported disadvantages included technical issues, discomfort with the impersonal nature, lack of familiarity with the platform, and privacy concerns. Overall, slightly more youth preferred in-person visits over telemedicine, referencing both specific characteristics of the clinical visit (ie, initial vs return and complexity) and proximity to the clinic as reasons for this preference. Although a plurality of TGD youth preferred in-person visits, they also recognized the value of telemedicine and the impact it may have in facilitating access to care.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the variations in needs and visit complexity, our study supports the provision of both in-person and telemedicine modalities as options for pediatric gender-affirming care.

Youth and family engagement in childhood disability evidence syntheses: A scoping review

Within the last decade, stakeholder engagement in research has become increasingly popular in childhood disability research; however, literature on the engagement of youth with neurodisabilities and their families in evidence syntheses is underdeveloped. Involving patients as partners in research has the potential to improve applicability and relevance of the research and benefit patient partners (e.g. enhanced self-esteem, increased research knowledge and skills); however, the methods, challenges, outcomes and recommendations of engaging youth with neurodisabilities and their families in evidence syntheses are unknown. Two parents of youth with complex disability needs were engaged as partners throughout this review. Following methods outlined by Arksey and O'Malley (2005), the primary research question in this scoping review is twofold: (i) what activities have youth with neurodisabilities and their families been engaged in as part of evidence syntheses and (ii) what were the outcomes of that engagement? After full text review of 369 articles, nine articles were included. Youth and families were engaged prior to the evidence synthesis and at every stage in the project, most often during data analysis where they contextualized the findings. Youth and family engagement were not formally evaluated; however, positive outcomes were reported by parents and researchers. Challenges such as increased time, sustaining engagement, and parents' dissatisfaction with their level of involvement were reported. Recommendations centred around providing partners with information, building relationships via social media, and openly communicating about roles, feedback and logistics. Childhood disability researchers should be aware of how they can increase engagement opportunities at all stages of evidence syntheses and how they might improve accessibility for youth with neurodisabilities and their families. Further research is needed to solidify a unified framework for conduct and reporting of youth and family engagement in evidence syntheses.

Co-Design of an Intervention to Increase the Participation in Leisure Activities Including Adolescents with Cerebral Palsy with GMFCS Levels IV and V: A Study Protocol

The participation of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) within the community is reduced compared to their peers and is a barrier to their socialization, self-determination and quality of life. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) is a key strategy for successful interventions, especially when involvement of the stakeholders takes place at all stages of the research. Co-design can be crucial for success as researchers, patients with CP and their families work together to bring the necessary elements to the interventions to be designed. The objectives will be: (1) To co-design an intervention aimed at improving the participation of adolescents with significant motor disabilities within the community in partnership with adolescents with CP, families and rehabilitation professionals. (2) To assess the feasibility of the co-design process in partnership with interested parties. The study will be based on Participatory Action Research (PAR) and will be held in Spain and Brazil. In both countries, the study will be carried out remotely with nine adolescents aged 12 to 17 years with CP, Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) levels IV-V, their families and six health professionals (physiotherapists and occupational therapists). Different dialogue groups will be created to involve adolescents, families and health professionals to the research's project. To manage their involvement in the co-design process, the Involvement Matrix (IM) will be used, and according to the IM phases, four steps will be included in the research: (1) Preparation; (2) Co-design; (3) Analysis: results of the intervention protocol and the study's feasibility and (4) Dissemination of results. Partnering with the public to design an intervention to improve participation can bring better results compared to protocols designed only by health professionals. In addition, it will allow for knowing the needs of adolescents with CP in terms of participation within the community. The study will also explore which roles were chosen by all participants and how they felt while actively participating in the process of co-designing an intervention protocol and their own perspectives on the use of the involvement matrix.

Die Perspektive der Patienten auf die HNO-Heilkunde – eine deutschlandweite Befragung

Hintergrund Patientenorientierung zur Entscheidungsfindung für die beste Behandlung, aber auch die Patientenbeteiligung an Forschungsprojekten wird mehr gefordert.

Methoden In einer multizentrischen prospektiven Querschnittsstudie haben HNO-Patienten im Juni 2021 in 27 HNO-Praxen, 18 HNO-Kliniken und 14 Universitäts-HNO-Kliniken die Möglichkeit, einen Laien-gerechten Fragebogen mit Fragen zur Patientenorientierung, evidenzbasierten Medizin, Forschungsbedarf und Gesundheitskompetenz ausgefüllt.

Ergebnisse 2023 Patientenantworten (46% weiblich; 49% 46–75 Jahre alt; 40% in HNO-Praxis) wurden ausgewertet. Als HNO-Erkrankung war am häufigsten eine Sinnesstörung (16,8%) oder ein Tumor (12,7%) angegeben. Gemeinsam bei Therapieentscheidungen zu agieren, wurde als Entscheidungsprozess favorisiert (43,5%). Genügend Zeit für das Gespräch wurde als wichtigstes Element der Beziehung genannt (15,8%). Die meisten Teilnehmer fühlten sich über die Behandlungsschritte gut informiert (42,4%). Bei der elektronischen Suche wurden vor allem allgemeine Suchmaschinen verwendet (50,3%). Drei Viertel der Teilnehmer (73,7%) hatte noch nie an einer Studie teilgenommen. Etwa zwei Drittel (62,8%) konnten sich das auch für die Zukunft nicht vorstellen. Faktoren wie Geschlecht, Alter, Schulbildung oder Ort der Befragung waren mit anderem Antwortverhalten assoziiert.

Diskussion Der Wunsch nach Patientenorientierung ist auch bei HNO-Patienten hoch und von den HNO-Ärzten in Praxis und Klinik auch häufig umgesetzt. Insbesondere Patienten mit geringer Schulbildung sollten bei der Planung und Durchführung von Studien stärker eingebunden werden, um Partizipationsmöglichkeiten gemäß den Empfehlungen der Förderinstitutionen zu geben.

A Blueprint for Involvement: Reflections of lived experience co-researchers and academic researchers on working collaboratively

Patient and public involvement in health research is important to ensure that research remains relevant to the patient groups it intends to benefit. The UK NIHR funded Blueprint study aimed to develop a 'model' of effective service design for children and young people with common mental health problems. To ensure Blueprint's findings were rooted in lived experience and informed by different perspectives, six young adults with lived experience of mental health issues were recruited, trained and employed as co-researchers to work alongside academic researchers . Blueprint collaborated with a third sector partner (McPin) to recruit, employ and mentor the co-researchers and deliver a bespoke training and mentoring package to support their development. Since Blueprint's scheduled work plan was significantly impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, planned co-researcher activities had to be adapted to accommodate distance learning and remote fieldwork and analysis. Blueprint's co-researchers, academic researchers and a representative of McPin collaboratively used a process of reflexivity and thematic analysis to capture Blueprint's involvement journey. We identified numerous benefits but also challenges to involvement, some of which were exacerbated by the pandemic. Navigating and overcoming these challenges also allowed us to collectively identify key guidelines for involvement for the wider research community which focus on enabling access to involvement, supporting co-researchers and optimising involvement for the benefit of co-researchers and research teams. This paper presents an overview of the Blueprint involvement journey from co-researcher, academic researcher and McPin perspectives, sharing our learning from the recruitment, training, fieldwork and analysis phases in order to inform the knowledge base on lived experience involvement and provide guidance to other researchers who seek to emulate this approach.

Developing a research agenda on exercise and physical activity for people with limb loss in Canada

PURPOSE

There is a lack of high-quality evidence about the effects of exercise or physical activity interventions for adults with lower limb amputations (LLAs). A planning meeting involving stakeholders (i.e., people with LLA, community advocates, health care providers, researchers) was organized to identify key research priorities related to exercise and physical activity for people with LLAs.

METHODS

We used a collaborative prioritized planning process with a pre-meeting survey and 2-day virtual meeting that included: identification and prioritization of challenges or gaps; identification and consolidation of solutions; and action planning. This process integrated a modified Delphi approach, including anonymous feedback in two surveys.

RESULTS

Thirty-five stakeholders participated. Six challenges related to exercise and physical activity for people with LLA were prioritized. One solution was prioritized for each challenge. After consolidation of solutions, participants developed five research action plans for research including: developing an on-line interface; developing and evaluating peer-support programs to support physical activity; examining integration of people with LLA into cardiac rehabilitation; development and evaluation of health provider education; and determining priority outcomes related to physical activity and exercise.

CONCLUSIONS

This collaborative process resulted in an action plan for amputation research and fostered collaborations to move identified priorities into action.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONLower limb amputations impact mobility leading to lower levels of physical activity.There are research gaps in our understanding of the effects of exercise or physical activity interventions for adults with lower limb amputations.Through a collaborative planning process, participants prioritized research directions on physical activity and exercise for people with LLA to advance research in the field.Action plans for research focused on developing online resources, peer support, cardiac rehabilitation for people with LLA, health provider education and determining priority outcomes related to physical activity and exercise.

Development of a patient and clinician co-led education program to promote living well with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator: Insights from a pilot project

Objective

To evaluate a pilot education program designed to improve patients' experience of living well with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD).

Methods

Patient Partners with previously implanted ICD and clinicians collaboratively performed monthly education sessions for potential and recent ICD recipients. Curriculum development was informed by current evidence of ICD patients' unique educational needs; delivery format transitioned to a virtual platform following the onset of COVID-19. Participants' experience was evaluated using a tailored questionnaire to explore preliminary insights.

Results

126 participants (median age: 62 years; women: 30%) attended 24 sessions. In-person participants (n = 62, 49.2%) reported sessions as helpful (n = 56, 94%) with regards to format and Patient Partner interactions. Virtual participants 64 (50.8%) completed an electronic survey (n = 27, 45%); reporting sufficient information for most topics with the exception of potential psychological effects of ICD implantation. Patient Partners as collaborative session leaders was perceived to be very helpful (n = 22, 82%) or somewhat helpful (n = 5, 18%).

Conclusion

This novel educational partnership met the learning needs of patients at the vulnerable time of new cardiac device implantation of both in-person and virtual formats.

Innovation

The inclusion of Patient Partners in co-led cardiac education informs novel approach to care that may improve patients' experiences of living well with complex technology.

The role of patient and public involvement in rapid qualitative studies: Can we carry out meaningful PPIE with time pressures?

INTRODUCTION

Rapid qualitative studies conducted with patient and public involvement can help promote policy-relevant and efficient research. There is a need to understand the experiences of researchers, patients, and members of the public to guide the development of good practice and to determine the extent to which rapid qualitative research can be implemented in PPIE projects.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study to explore the experiences of research teams that carried out studies using rapid techniques with patient and public involvement. We carried out 26 interviews with researchers, coordinators, patients, carers, service users and members of the public.

RESULTS

This study identified needs which related to practical and time constraints. Rapid qualitative research tends to be limited to certain PPIE groups, and particular phases of the research process. Study findings are rarely discussed with PPIE members. The educational needs of rapid qualitative research were also identified. Researchers and PPIE members considered three main issues: a lack of training on patient involvement for researchers, rapid qualitative research training for PPIE members, and the diversity of PPIE members.

CONCLUSION

We found that rapid researchers were able to involve patients and members of the public in research despite time pressures. The challenges identified in this study can be used to plan future training programmes for researchers and PPIE panel members and develop strategies to recruit PPIE panel members from a wide range of backgrounds.

PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The research aim was to explore the experiences of those carrying out rapid qualitative studies with PPIE. As such, the participants of this study included patients, carers, service users and members of the public, who were interviewed individually. A lived experienced researcher and PPIE member for a hospital conducted the design, data collection and analysis of the study. The study brief was to interview researchers only. The lived-experience researcher initiated the inclusion of PPIE members as participants, therefore strengthening the study design. We shared the draft report with the PPIE participants for participant validation and to maintain a continuous feedback relationship. This led to addressing key issues in designing and involving PPIE members in more meaningful and equal ways. Whilst there is agreement on activities which centre on PPIE, there is no consensus on how to achieve these in high quality rapid qualitative studies.

Codesigning simulations and analyzing the process to ascertain principles of authentic and meaningful research engagement in childhood disability research

BACKGROUND

Including youth with disabilities and their families as partners in childhood disability research is imperative but can be challenging to do in an authentic and meaningful way. Simulation allows individuals to learn in a controlled environment and provides an opportunity to try new approaches. The objectives of the research study were to (1) codesign a suite of simulations and facilitation resources and understand how stakeholders engaged in the codesign process; and (2) describe the principles of authentic and meaningful research engagement as identified by stakeholders.

METHODS

Interdisciplinary stakeholder groups, including youth with disabilities, parents, researchers, and trainees, codesigned simulation training videos by developing shared storylines about challenges with research engagement that were then performed and digitally recorded with standardized patient actors. Two forms of data were collected: (1) observations via field notes and video recordings were analyzed to understand the codesign process; and (2) interviews were analyzed to understand principles of authentic and meaningful engagement.

RESULTS

Four simulation training videos were developed, and topics included: (1) forming a project team; (2) identifying project objectives and priorities; (3) reviewing results; and (4) navigating concerns about knowledge translation. Thirteen participants participated in the simulation codesign; nine of whom consented to be observed in the codesign process and seven who completed follow up interviews. We identified two themes about authentic and meaningful engagement in research: (1) whether the invitation to engage on a project was authentic and meaningful or was extended to 'tick a box'; and (2) whether there were authentic and meaningful opportunities to contribute (e.g., valued contributions aligned with people's lived experience, skills, and interests) or if they only served as a 'rubber stamp'. Communication and expectations tied the 'tick box' and 'rubber stamp' themes together and underlie whether engagement was authentic and meaningful.

CONCLUSIONS

For research engagement to be authentic and meaningful, researchers and families need to set clear expectations, build rapport, have tangible supports, use clear communication, and build time and space to work together. Future work will explore the utility of the simulations and whether they improve knowledge and attitudes about authentic and meaningful engagement in research.

Children, young people and parent engagement in health intervention design and implementation: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Engaging children and young people (CYP) with and without their parents in health research has the potential to improve the development and implementation of health interventions. However, to our knowledge, the scope of engagement activities used with this population and barriers to their engagement is unknown. The objective of this review was to identify and describe CYP engagement with and without their parents in the development and/or implementation of health interventions.

METHODS

This scoping review included any primary research studies reporting on engaging CYP, with or without parents, in the design and/or implementation of health interventions. Healthcare professionals had to be involved over the course of the study and the study had to take place in either community, primary or tertiary care settings. The following databases were searched in May 2017, May 2020 and June 2021: Medline (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO) and Embase (Elsevier). Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles and used a previously piloted extraction form to extract and summarize information from the included articles.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight articles discussing twenty-four studies were included. CYP engagement throughout the research cycle was limited. There were no observed differences in the reported presence of engagement, types of interventions or outcomes of engagement between studies engaging CYP or CYP and parents. Studies engaging CYP and parents contained limited information on how these relationships affected outcomes of engagement. Engagement was enabled primarily by the maintenance of resources and relationships among stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

Although CYP engagement often influenced health intervention and implementation design, they are inconsistently engaged across the research cycle. It is unclear whether parental involvement enhances CYP engagement. Future research should consider reporting guidelines to clarify the level of CYP and/or parent engagement, and enhance CYP engagement by fostering synergistic and sustainable partnerships with key stakeholders.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

A parent partner with codesign experience contributed to the creation of the research questions, screened titles, abstracts and full texts, helped with data extraction and provided feedback on the manuscript.

Rasch Measurement Theory's contribution to the psychometric properties of a co-created measure of health and wellness for Indigenous children and youth

OBJECTIVES

To determine how Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) methods can be used to assess the psychometric properties of the Aaniish Naa Gegii: the Children's Health and Wellbeing Measure (ACHWM) and Qanuippit.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Indigenous children aged 8-18 years, from five communities, completed the 62-item ACHWM. We applied RMT methods to ACHWM data from 401 children (mean age 13.4 ± 3.4 years; 51% male) from across Ontario to examine how well the items captured the full range (±3 logit) of the concept of interest in each domain, targeted the needs of Indigenous children, and met the criteria for unidimensional and invariant measurement.

RESULTS

RMT results indicated moderate-fit overall fit (raw χ² = 809, P < 0.001). This model was further improved by aggregating the five response categories into three categories. All four domains showed excellent overall fit to the Rasch model (P > 0.05), with items covering between -4.51 and 6.02 logit, with no gaps along the theoretical continua.

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence that a set of conceptually derived items was able to produce a measure that fits the Rasch model. These results aid our understanding of wellness by establishing the clinical meaning of the scale scores.

Consumer Engagement in Perioperative Clinical Trials

Consumer engagement (patient and public involvement) in perioperative medicine research is in its infancy. The patient experience and family/carer perspectives can provide an extra layer of insight to give more understanding as to what, why, and how we do research. Patients who have undergone surgery have a unique understanding of the issues, concerns, wants, and needs that they learned as a patient-they, therefore, can be considered as a professional given their experience(s)-thus warranting recognition as a partner in research. Knowledge of the consumer engagement literature and availability of resources should support anesthesia researchers aiming to include these perspectives in their research. This includes several existing engagement frameworks and assessment tools. We provide a framework for consumer engagement for adoption into anesthesia and other perioperative research. By incorporating the patient or caregiver into the design, funding application(s), data collection, and interpretation of the findings can be beneficial to all. This includes promoting knowledge and access to clinical trials, the wording of participant consent and information forms, methods of data collection, selection of important outcomes, and dissemination of results.

Capturing Meaningful Outcomes in -Pediatric Neurology: Further Reflections on Principles, Challenges, and Opportunities

Patient and public involvement in health care is considered indispensable in the way we conduct daily pediatric neurology practice, and in the development and utilization of health outcome measurements. This essay examines what meaningful quality evaluations and measurements are, describes the development of approaches to measuring health and outcomes, explores the potential applications of patient-reported outcome measures in pediatric neurology, and identifies opportunities and challenges in using patient-reported outcome measurements in our daily clinical practice. Recent developments have transformed our attitude on how to help children with neurological and developmental conditions and their families: specifically, (1) the recognition of the fundamental rights of children with disabilities; (2) the application of the framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health by the World Health Organization that views health from the perspective of both biopsychosocial strengths and functional abilities; (3) the application of qualitative research methodologies to children with neurological conditions and their caregivers to elucidate what they consider essential for their own good health and well-being; and (4) the development of core outcome measurements sets for children and adults with various neurological and developmental conditions. In summary, supporting patients in their role as full partners in clinical care and research enables them to contribute their experiential knowledge and helps ensure that results are relevant and address patient needs, preferences, and priorities. Recognizing the importance of involving young people in their health management decisions has become central in contemporary medicine and needs to be part of the curriculum of all health care professionals.

A systematic literature review to identify ethical, legal, and social responsibilities of nonprofit organizations when funding clinical trials in pediatric cancer

Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) play critical roles as funding sources, research partners, and disseminators of drug developments in pediatric cancer. Yet the literature provides limited guidance about ethical best practices when NPOs make trial funding decisions in this space. We conducted a systematic review of the literature indexed in PubMed and Web of Science to identify the ethical, legal, and social responsibilities of NPOs to four key stakeholder groups in funding pediatric cancer trials: (i) patients/families, (ii) researchers, (iii) industry sponsors, and (iv) donors. We applied the lifecycle framework for patient engagement in drug research and development proposed by Geissler and colleagues to analyze themes related to NPOs' responsibilities across 54 articles that met our inclusion criteria. Emergent themes included transparency surrounding conflicts of interest, the rigor of scientific review, and communication with patients/communities about trial progress. Our research identified critical gaps in best practices for negotiating research partnerships, managing competing research priorities, and pursuing alternative financing models including venture philanthropy. Results from our review informed a set of best practices to guide NPOs in making trial funding decisions that align with stakeholder values and interests.

Engaging veterans in the research process: a practical guide

Aims: Provide guidance for engaging military veterans in various research teams to help overcome veterans' lack of trust in research. Methods: We draw from our combined experience to present four case studies of veteran research on sensitive topics to illustrate successful engagement with veterans. Results: For each case example, we describe veterans' contributions at different phases of research. We then share practical guidance for realizing benefits and overcoming challenges of engaging veterans in research at each phase. In our experience, successful engagement has built trust by aligning research with participants' own experience as veterans. Conclusion: Investigators wishing to engage veterans in research may benefit from the lessons presented through these case studies.

Including People with Parkinson’s Disease in Clinical Study Design and Execution: A Call to Action

The proactive inclusion of patients in the design and execution of clinical studies has been an emerging focus for decades. Such participatory research helps to design studies better, by addressing relevant research questions and defining outcomes that matter to patients. Yet, much remains to be learned about the best methods and exact impacts of patient engagement in research in general, and more specifically, about the specific challenges that come with Parkinson’s disease. Here we present the lived experiences of patient researchers living with Parkinson’s disease, as a motivation for the value of their perspectives in research and as a call to action for empirical research on how to successfully include patient researchers.

Patient engagement partnerships in clinical trials (PEP-CT): protocol for the systematic development and testing of patient partner and investigator decision aids

INTRODUCTION

Building capacity to improve sex/gender knowledge and strengthen patient engagement in clinical trials requires training and support. The overall goal of this 2-year project is to refine, translate and evaluate two web-based open-access patient and investigator decision aids aimed to improve patient engagement partnerships in clinical trials.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Two decision aids were designed in Phase 1 of this programme of research and this protocol describes a subsequent sequential phased approach to refine/translate (Phase 2A) and conduct alpha/usability (Phase 2B) and beta/field (Phase 3) testing. Decision aid development is guided by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, User-Centred Design, Ottawa Decision-Support Framework and the Ottawa Model of Research Use. We have integrated patient-oriented research methods by engaging patient partners across all phases of our programme of research. Decision aids will first be refined and then translated to French (Phase 2A). Eight iterative cycles of semistructured interviews with 40 participants (20 patient partners and 20 investigators) will be conducted to determine usability (Phase 2B). A pragmatic pre/post pilot study design will then be implemented for field/beta testing using another purposive sample of 80 English-speaking and French-speaking participants (40 patients and 40 investigators). The samples are purposive to ensure an equal representation of English-speaking and French-speaking participants and an equal representation of men and women. Since sex and/or gender differences in utilisation and effectiveness of decision aids have not been previously reported, Phase 3 outcomes will be reported for the total sample and separately for men and women.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted from the University of Toronto (41109, 28 September 2021). Informed consent will be obtained from participants. Dissemination will include co-authored publications, conference presentations, educational national public forums, fact sheets/newsletters, social media sharing and videos/webinars.

The Research Family Advisory Committee: the patient and family view of implementing a research-focused patient engagement strategy

Patient engagement in research, a collaborative practice of including patients and families as active and respected partners in the research process, leads to improved quality of patient care and positively affects outcomes for patients and families. There is strong support for the benefits of patient engagement. What is less clear are the methods by which organizations can achieve authentic patient engagement in research and the ways a committee structure can support an institutional research engagement need beyond the individual investigators. In this report, we describe the mechanisms needed to support the implementation of a research-focused patient engagement strategy and lessons learned from the patient and family perspective.