Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorDomecq, J. P.
dc.contributor.authorPrutsky, G.
dc.contributor.authorElraiyah, T.
dc.contributor.authorWang, Z.
dc.contributor.authorNabhan, M.
dc.contributor.authorShippee, N.
dc.contributor.authorBrito, J. P.
dc.contributor.authorBoehmer, K.
dc.contributor.authorHasan, R.
dc.contributor.authorFirwana, B.
dc.contributor.authorErwin, P.
dc.contributor.authorEton, D.
dc.contributor.authorSloan, J.
dc.contributor.authorMontori, V.
dc.contributor.authorAsi, N.
dc.contributor.authorDabrh, A. M. A.
dc.contributor.authorMurad, M. H.
dc.date.accessioned2021-03-01T10:53:19Z
dc.date.available2021-03-01T10:53:19Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.citationDomecq, J.P., Prutsky, G., Elraiyah Wang, T.Z., Nabhan, M. & Shippee, N. (2014). Patient engagement in research: a systematic review. BMC Health Service Research, 14, 89.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2730893
dc.description.abstractBackground A compelling ethical rationale supports patient engagement in healthcare research. It is also assumed that patient engagement will lead to research findings that are more pertinent to patients’ concerns and dilemmas. However; it is unclear how to best conduct this process. In this systematic review we aimed to answer 4 key questions: what are the best ways to identify patient representatives? How to engage them in designing and conducting research? What are the observed benefits of patient engagement? What are the harms and barriers of patient engagement? Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane, EBSCO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Business Search Premier, Academic Search Premier and Google Scholar. Included studies were published in English, of any size or design that described engaging patients or their surrogates in research design. We conducted an environmental scan of the grey literature and consulted with experts and patients. Data were analyzed using a non-quantitative, meta-narrative approach. Results We included 142 studies that described a spectrum of engagement. In general, engagement was feasible in most settings and most commonly done in the beginning of research (agenda setting and protocol development) and less commonly during the execution and translation of research. We found no comparative analytic studies to recommend a particular method. Patient engagement increased study enrollment rates and aided researchers in securing funding, designing study protocols and choosing relevant outcomes. The most commonly cited challenges were related to logistics (extra time and funding needed for engagement) and to an overarching worry of a tokenistic engagement. Conclusions Patient engagement in healthcare research is likely feasible in many settings. However, this engagement comes at a cost and can become tokenistic. Research dedicated to identifying the best methods to achieve engagement is lacking and clearly needed.en_US
dc.publisherBMC Health Services Researchen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectsystematic reviewen_US
dc.subjectpatienten_US
dc.subjectengagementen_US
dc.subjectpatient centered outcomes researchen_US
dc.titlePatient engagement in research: a systematic reviewen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.source.volume14en_US
dc.source.journalBMC Health Services Researchen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-14-89
dc.source.articlenumber89en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal