RESUMEN

The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the status of patient/public involvement (PPI) in oncology research, including definitions, regulatory aspects, ongoing clinical activities in different countries, achievements and difficulties. The 10-year activities of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) Patient Advisory Board are described, illustrating challenges faced and solutions in daily practice. Even though clinical data are still limited, it appears PPI has great potential for development in oncology. The drive for precision medicine, activities of patient organizations, pharmaceutical industry interest, and strong support from regulatory agencies, are facilitators to integration of PPI throughout the drug development process. Despite the availability of guidance documents providing recommendations for the implementation of PPI, lack of human and structural resources, training for patients / caregivers and healthcare personnel, and lack of collaboration among stakeholders are some of the main barriers reported. More rigorous reporting of PPI in clinical studies is needed, including the methods to evaluate the impact of PPI and in the representation of patients as partner.

RESUMEN

Introduction: Children and young people experiencing chronic pain are at greater risk of inequitable and poor-quality pain management, which has implications for future management of pain in adulthood. Most chronic pain research is conducted with adults who are more likely to be middle-class, white and monocultured. Inclusive and diverse recruitment practices in paediatric pain research can be an area in which we can address this imbalance of representation. The aim of this current work was to explore these practices and to co-produce recommendations regarding recruitment strategies for paediatric pain research. Methods: The research team worked with Your Rheum, a United Kingdom young person's advisory group (ages 11-24 years) and diagnosed with rheumatic condition(s), the opportunity to input into rheumatology research. At a virtual Your Rheum meeting, eight young people (female = 7, male = 1, age range 12-24) took part in group discussions, sharing their experiences of taking part in research and their decision process. Online tools, including Mentimeter and Miro, were used to aid conversations and share ideas. Results: Most young people had experience of taking part in research as a study participant (n = 5). Recommendations synthesised included increased awareness of research in general. The young people discussed being open to hearing about research opportunities; they reflected that they are rarely exposed to these invitations or hear about current research. The clinic environment was highlighted as a "good and trustworthy" recruitment area - being approached by a member of the research team was considered ideal, even if it was someone they had not met previously. Many young people recalled little discussions of research at their clinical appointments. Deciding to participate in research included the following considerations: benefit/impact; connecting with others; research topic; which is then balanced against convenience, and reimbursement. The young people felt that taking part in research was empowering and helped them take ownership of their pain management. Conclusion: It is essential to understand the perspectives of potential study participants, to plan successful recruitment strategies. Ensuring we consider these factors when designing our studies and recruitment strategies is beneficial to all involved. Co-produced recruitment strategies would aid inclusive (and increased) research participation.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of trustworthy information about Functional Somatic Symptoms (FSS) on the internet. This means integrative bio-psycho-social explanations of FSS and related health advice are not readily available to the public. To explore and address this problem, we carried out the bodysymptoms project, with the aim to build a website which presents current widely accepted explanations for FSS and shows how different explanations are inter-connected. METHODS: Bodysymptoms was set up as a research-in-action project with a diverse range of international stakeholder-participants, combining approaches from patient and public involvement in healthcare with participatory design. 7 participants with lived experience of multi-system functional symptoms took part in the project and measures of meaningful engagement throughout the project were rated highly. This manuscript describes the methodology by which the website was developed. RESULTS: Through iterative cycles we determined the requirements for an interactive explanatory model and co-created a novel online health interactive resource with integrated actionable health advice. The target end user are young adults with persistent physical symptoms, maintained by functional mechanisms. The overall aim is to empower people at risk of developing functional disorders to seek better health outcomes. The website is intended to be used prior to or alongside engagement with healthcare. CONCLUSION: Bringing lived experience and multi-disciplinary perspectives into dialogue through participatory design can harness the power of research to create immediate shared value. This project has resulted in a usable open access website, bodysymptoms.org, which provides education about FSS for patients, healthcare professionals and members of the public looking to understand FSS.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: Radiotherapy (RT) stands as one of the main cancer treatments. The impact of RT and cancer treatment can have a physical and psychological impact on patients and their carers. To gain patient's trust, and ensure they feel valued, information should be provided before, during, and after RT. Patient and public involvement (PPI) has been lacking, and increased engagement with PPI groups could improve this. This rapid review aims to analyse the literature, and describe and report patient perception, experience, and satisfaction regarding the information received concerning their course of RT. Methods: To allow the synthesis of results, a pragmatic decision was made to use a rapid review approach to analyse the literature, providing more timely information to inform future work. This rapid review utilised systematic review methods and was conducted according to a pre-defined protocol including clear inclusion criteria (PROSPERO registration: CRD42023415916).Electronic databases CINAHL, AMED, Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched using a comprehensive search for published studies from January 2012 to November 2023. Two independent reviewers applied the eligibility criteria. Evidence from literature was extracted and transcribed into qualitative data and Braun and Clarke's six-step thematic analysis (TA) was employed to determine themes by one reviewer and checked by a second [26]. Due to the heterogeneity of the included literature, the analysis of this review is presented primarily through narrative synthesis. Results: Sixty eight articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Emerging themes included; a desire for information based on patient characteristics, information format, patient preparedness, timing e.g. timing of information and changing priorities over time, health care professional (HCP) involvement, barriers to information, and motivators for better information delivery. Conclusions: Several factors can influence a patient's desire for information, from whom and when they receive it, to what format they would prefer to receive it. There is benefit to be gained in employing PPI and patient advocacy to inform future studies that aim to further understand the themes that emerged from this review. Such studies can therefore inform HCPs in providing patient-specific information and support by utilising multiple teaching strategies available to them.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In recent years, projects to develop reporting guidelines have attempted to integrate the perspectives of patients and public members. Best practices for patient and public involvement (PPI) in such projects have not yet been established. We recently developed an extension of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), to be used for systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) for OMIs 2024. Patients and public members formed a small but impactful stakeholder group. We critically evaluated the PPI component in this project and developed recommendations for conducting PPI when developing reporting guidelines. MAIN TEXT: A patient partner was an integral research team member at the project development and grant application stage. Once the project started, five patient and public contributors (PPCs) were recruited to participate in the Delphi study; three PPCs contributed to subsequent steps. We collected quantitative feedback through surveys; qualitative feedback was garnered through a focus group discussion after the Delphi study and through debrief meetings after subsequent project activities. Feedback was thematically combined with reflections from the research team, and was predominantly positive. The following themes emerged: importance of PPI partnership, number of PPCs involved, onboarding, design of Delphi surveys, flexibility in the process, complexity of PPI in methodological research, and power imbalances. Impacts of PPI on the content and presentation of the reporting guideline were evident, and reciprocal learning between PPCs and the research team occurred throughout the project. Lessons learned were translated into 17 recommendations for future projects. CONCLUSION: Integrating PPI in the development of PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 was feasible and considered valuable by PPCs and the research team. Our approach can be applied by others wishing to integrate PPI in developing reporting guidelines.

RESUMEN

The World Health Organization and American Academy of Paediatrics recommend exclusive breastfeeding until 6 months of age, with continued breastfeeding along with complementary solid foods for up to 2 years and beyond. Despite the well-established importance of breastfeeding, Irish rates remain the lowest in Europe. Healthcare professionals' breastfeeding knowledge and skills have a positive impact on increasing breastfeeding rates. There is limited evidence of the knowledge, attitudes or practices of general practitioners (GPs) and general practice nurses (GPNs), which is essential to breastfeeding in Ireland. The aim of this study was to evaluate the breastfeeding knowledge, attitudes and practices of GPs and GPNs in one community healthcare organisation (CHO) in Ireland. A co-designed evaluation study was used following low-risk ethical exemption (LS-LR-22-161). A modified version of a validated breastfeeding questionnaire was developed. A Project Steering Committee was established that included patient, and public involvement stakeholders. The anonymised survey was distributed via online Qualtrics platform (November 2022-February 2023). STROBE Guidelines were utilised. The overall response rate was 25.9% (n = 121) and valid responses were reported in the article. The total population size was n = 468 (GPs n = 290 and GPNs n = 178). Our pilot study identified that 42.7% (n = 47/110) of respondents never attended a breastfeeding education programme, and 53.9% (n = 55/102) identified that their knowledge could be improved. The majority of respondents, 92.9% (n = 92/99) wish to complete further education in breastfeeding. The results of this pilot study in one CHO in Ireland indicate a gap in knowledge and a need for specific breastfeeding and lactation theoretical and skills training for GPs and GPNs working in primary care to support, promote and protect breastfeeding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The internet, especially YouTube, has become a prominent source of health information. However, the quality and accuracy of medical content on YouTube vary, posing concerns about misinformation. This study focuses on providing reliable information about hereditary breast cancer on YouTube, given its importance for decision-making among patients and families. The study examines the quality and accessibility of such content in Japanese, where limited research has been conducted. METHODS: A nonprofit organization called BC Tube was established in May 2020 to create informative videos about breast cancer. The study analyzed 85 YouTube videos selected using the Japanese keywords "hereditary breast cancer" and "HBOC", categorized into six groups based on the source of upload: BC Tube, hospitals/governments, individual physicians, public-interest organizations/companies, breast cancer survivors, and others. The videos were evaluated based on various factors, including content length, view counts, likes, comments, and the presence of advertisements. The content was evaluated using the PEMAT and DISCERN quality criteria. RESULTS: BC Tube created high-quality videos with high scores on PEMAT understandability, significantly outperforming other sources. Videos from public-interest organizations/companies received the most views and likes, despite their lower quality. Videos from medical institutions and governments were of superior quality but attracted less attention. CONCLUSIONS: Our study emphasizes the importance of promoting accessible, easy-to-understand, and widely recognized medical information online. The popularity of videos does not always correspond to their quality, emphasizing the importance of quality evaluation. BC Tube provides a peer-reviewed platform to disseminate high-quality health information. We need to develop high-quality online health information and encourage the promotion of evidence-based information on YouTube.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The use of participatory research approaches in the field of dementia and forensic mental health research has been on the rise. Advisory board structures, involving people with lived experience (PWLE), have frequently been used for guiding and leading research. Yet, there has been limited guidance on the establishment, retention and use of advisory boards in the field of dementia and forensic mental health research. OBJECTIVE: This project outlined in this research protocol will investigate the benefits and challenges of establishing three patient advisory boards, involving PWLE, practitioners and researchers with the purpose to guide research. Data will be used to develop guidelines for best practice in involving PWLE in dementia and forensic mental health research through advisory boards. METHODS: The research project will be divided into three phases: Phase I will involve two topic-specific systematic reviews on the use of participatory research with PWLE, followed by an initial study exploring PWLE's, practitioners' and researchers' expectations on research involvement. Phase II will consist of the establishment of three advisory boards, one focusing on dementia, one on forensic mental health and one overarching coordinating advisory board, which will involve PWLE from both fields. Phase III, will consist of interviews and focus groups with advisory board members, exploring any challenges and benefits of involving PWLE and practitioners in advisory boards for guiding research. To capture the impact of involving PWLE in different research phases and tasks, interviews and focus groups will be conducted at four different points of time (0, 6, 12, 18 months). Reflexive thematic analysis will be used for the analysis of data. DISCUSSION: The project aims to explore the involvement of PWLE and practitioners in guiding research and aims to develop guidelines for best practice in establishing and using patient advisory boards in dementia and forensic mental health research and involving PWLE and practitioners in research.

There is an increasing involvement of people with mental health issues in research, especially in the form of advisory boards. So far People With Lived Experience [PWLE] of mental health issues acquired either from first person experience or through family members, and mental health practitioners' involvement in research has been found to benefit research and society. This is because it increases reach and quality of research, whilst raising the voice of people commonly excluded from decision making (e.g. research, care provision). This research protocol describes the design of a three-year research project. The project aims to establish and use patient advisory boards, involving PWLE, practitioners and researchers, to guide research. The project will consist of three phases: (1) a review of previous studies on the use of participatory research with PWLE of dementia and forensic mental health care, followed by an initial study exploring PWLE's, practitioners' and researchers' expectations in research involvement, (2) the establishment of three advisory boards, one focusing on dementia, one on forensic mental health and one overarching coordinating advisory board, and (3) an exploration of challenges, barriers and benefits of involving PWLE of dementia/forensic mental health care and practitioners in advisory boards for research through interviews and focus groups. Interviews with PWLE and practitioners involved in the advisory boards will be conducted at four different points of time (0, 6, 12, 18 month). At the end, we aim to develop guidelines for establishing advisory board structures, involving PWLE and practitioners in research.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Although stakeholder involvement in policymaking is attracting attention in the fields of medicine and healthcare, a practical methodology has not yet been established. Rare-disease policy, specifically research priority setting for the allocation of limited research resources, is an area where evidence generation through stakeholder involvement is expected to be effective. We generated evidence for rare-disease policymaking through stakeholder involvement and explored effective collaboration among stakeholders. METHODS: We constructed a space called 'Evidence-generating Commons', where patients, family members, researchers, and former policymakers can share their knowledge and experiences and engage in continual deliberations on evidence generation. Ten rare diseases were consequently represented. In the 'Commons', 25 consecutive workshops were held predominantly online, from 2019 to 2021. These workshops focused on (1) clarification of difficulties faced by rare-disease patients, (2) development and selection of criteria for priority setting, and (3) priority setting through the application of the criteria. For the first step, an on-site workshop using sticky notes was held. The data were analysed based on KJ method. For the second and third steps, workshops on specific themes were held to build consensus. The workshop agendas and methods were modified based on participants' feedback. RESULTS: The 'Commons' was established with 43 participants, resulting in positive effects such as capacity building, opportunities for interactions, mutual understanding, and empathy among the participants. The difficulties faced by patients with rare diseases were classified into 10 categories. Seven research topics were identified as priority issues to be addressed including 'impediments to daily life', 'financial burden', 'anxiety', and 'burden of hospital visits'. This was performed by synthesising the results of the application of the two criteria that were particularly important to strengthen future research on rare diseases. We also clarified high-priority research topics by using criteria valued more by patients and family members than by researchers and former policymakers, and criteria with specific perspectives. CONCLUSION: We generated evidence for policymaking in the field of rare diseases. This study's insights into stakeholder involvement can enhance evidence-informed policymaking. We engaged in comprehensive discussions with policymakers regarding policy implementation and planned analysis of the participants' experiences in this project.

Stakeholder involvement is significant for effective policymaking in the field of rare diseases. However, practical methods for this involvement have not yet been established. Therefore, we developed the 'Commons project' to generate valuable policymaking information and explore effective ways for stakeholders' collaboration. This article explains the process and results of 25 continuous workshops, held from 2019 to 2021 with 43 participants, including patients, family members, researchers, and former policymakers. The main achievements of the discussion that took place in the 'Commons' included a presentation of the overview of the difficulties faced by patients with rare diseases and formulation of high priority research topics.First, the difficulties faced by patients with rare diseases were grouped into 10 categories. Second, seven research topics were identified as priority issues including 'impediments to daily life', 'financial burden', 'anxiety', and 'burden of hospital visits'. During the project process, positive effects such as capacity building, opportunities for interactions, mutual understanding, and empathy among the participants, were identified. Beyond the context of the field of rare diseases and science of policy, these findings are useful for the future of society, including co-creation among stakeholders and patient and public involvement. Based on this study's results, we have initiated communications with policy stakeholders in the field of rare diseases, with the aim of policy implementation.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) ensures that research is designed and conducted in a manner that is most beneficial to the individuals whom it will impact. It has an undisputed place in applied research and is required by many funding bodies. However, PPI in statistical methodology research is more challenging and work is needed to identify where and how patients and the public can meaningfully input in this area. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional research study was conducted using an online questionnaire, which asked statistical methodologists about themselves and their experience conducting PPI, either to inform a grant application or during a funded statistical methodology project. The survey included both closed-text responses, which were reported using summary statistics, and open-ended questions for which common themes were identified. RESULTS: 119 complete responses were recorded. Individuals who completed the survey displayed an even range of ages, career lengths and positions, with the majority working in academia. 40.3% of participants reported undertaking PPI to inform a grant application and the majority reported that the inclusion of PPI was received positively by the funder. Only 21.0% of participants reported undertaking PPI during a methodological project. 31.0% of individuals thought that PPI was "very" or "extremely" relevant to statistical methodology research, with 45.5% responding "somewhat" and 24.4% answering "not at all" or "not very". Arguments for including PPI were that it can provide the motivation for research and shape the research question. Negative opinions included that it is too technical for the public to understand, so they cannot have a meaningful impact. CONCLUSIONS: This survey found that the views of statistical methodologists on the inclusion of PPI in their research are varied, with some individuals having particularly strong opinions, both positive and negative. Whilst this is clearly a divisive topic, one commonly identified theme was that many researchers are willing to try and incorporate meaningful PPI into their research but would feel more confident if they had access to resources such as specialised training, guidelines, and case studies.

Patient and public involvement (or PPI) means researchers working in partnership with patients and the public in any part of research. It can include helping decide what the research question is, how to pass on results to the public, and telling researchers what areas are most important to patients and the public. Statistical methods are the tools we use to analyse data. Statistical methodology research involves making sure these tools use our healthcare data in the best way. PPI is essential in health research and is becoming more common in statistical methodology research. But it can be hard to know how to include patients and the public in statistical methodology research. It may seem complex and not directly related to patients. This paper describes the results from a survey we did about the experiences of researchers who have carried out PPI for statistical methodology research. We asked them what they think about it, and how it affects their research. We also asked if they feel confident including PPI in their research, and whether they are given enough help. Researchers had different views about PPI for statistical methodology research. Some people thought PPI was very important in their research, but others weren't sure. Many people said that they would like more help such as training and guidelines to help them do better PPI in the future.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Pediatric trials are possible through voluntary participation of children, youth (age ≤ 18 years), and their families. Despite important arguments for trialists to provide trial progress or results, and evidence that participants desire it, this information remains rarely shared with youth and their families. Little guidance exists on how trialists can best communicate trial results back to participants and their families. Guided by Liabo et al.'s framework, we describe how we developed a pediatric-specific, "plain language summary" clinical trial results template called CommuniKIDS with an adult patient partner, family partner (parent), youth advisors, and parent advisors, taking into account their unique knowledge needs and preferences. MAIN TEXT: Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) was integrated in the development of the CommuniKIDS template. In collaboration with Clinical Trials Ontario, we used a generic trial results template as a starting point. The core project leadership team included a patient partner and a family partner from project inception to completion. Five youth (ages 13-18 years) and eight parent advisors were consulted at each point of the development process through three virtual workshops conducted separately; youth workshops were led by a youth facilitator. During these workshops, advisors agreed on the importance and value of sharing trial results, and expressed their preferences on content, format, and timing of sharing trial results. PPI-led improvements included the addition of three new sections to the CommuniKIDS template: "at a glance," "side effects," and "next steps." We reflect on our PPI strategy in the context of five "values" and six "practicalities" identified as good PPI principles, and summarize lessons learned when collaborating with youth and families from this project. CONCLUSION: Involvement of a patient partner, a family partner, youth advisors, and parent advisors in the development of CommuniKIDS was critical to create a clinical trial results template that is useful and relevant to its end-users. To our knowledge, CommuniKIDS is the first to meaningfully engage youth and parents as advisors and partners in developing a plain language summary results template for pediatric trial participants and their families. Our experience of co-developing CommuniKIDS demonstrates that meaningful PPI can be achieved in trial results communication and knowledge translation practices. This report provides resources for those seeking to involve youth and families in their initiatives and in meaningfully sharing trial results.

The voluntary participation of youth aged 18 and under in clinical trials makes it possible for researchers and healthcare providers to study medications and other treatments. However, most youth and their families who take part in clinical trials do not get any information on the trial's progress or results, leaving many to wonder if anything useful came from their participation. There is an ethical obligation to give this information back to youth and their families, who might take risks by participating in trials. The aim of the CommuniKIDS project was to develop a "plain language summary" results template to share trial results back to youth and their families. Working with a patient partner, a family partner, five youth advisors (ages 13­18), and eight parent advisors, we set out to understand what youth and parents would like to see in a plain language summary of clinical trial results. The needs and preferences discussed with the advisors were included to create a child/youth health-specific template. The CommuniKIDS project is the first to involve youth and parents as advisors in developing a plain language summary results template for child/youth health trials. Here, we describe how we involved youth and parents in the development of CommuniKIDS, how the template was customized to be youth and family-friendly and reflect on lessons learned.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To understand how materiality affects patient and public involvement (PPI) for commissioning and leading health and care services in the English National Health Service (NHS) context. CONTEXT: From April 2013 groups of general practitioners (GPs) became members of NHS clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to assess needs and procure core health services for and with local communities. Since July 2022, integrated care systems (ICSs) have subsumed this responsibility. NHS reorganisations have been driven by the promise of more effective and efficient health care and have led to a long history of PPI on economic, political, and moral grounds. Few studies researching PPI in clinical commissioning exist and fewer still have explored a more agentic understanding of materiality and its impact on PPI. STUDY DESIGN: A focused ethnography was used to examine PPI for clinical commissioning within two CCG case study sites in England. Three CCG Governing Body lay representatives, nine GP commissioners and seven service user representatives took part in focus groups and/or were interviewed. Fifteen nonparticipant observations were also carried out at CCG meetings and the associated materiality was examined. FINDINGS: The materiality of activities involved in clinical commissioning influences and shapes the nature of PPI. These forms of materiality may dilute and subvert meaningful engagement and involvement that relies on trust, leadership, learning, and partnership working. CONCLUSION: System leaders in ICSs should consider the significance of materiality in centrally driven processes involved in PPI commissioning to reduce barriers and ensure meaningful partnerships within local communities. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The study design ensured PPI throughout the research process in keeping with contemporary research practice guidance. The project steering committee included service users with current or recent PPI clinical commissioning experience outside of the study sites. There was PPI involvement in the original study proposal and its development including the bid for doctoral funds on which this study is based. All were involved in assessing the rigour of the data collection, interpretation of the findings and ensuring the project remained true to the aims of the study. Two members have also participated in presentation of the study findings.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We recently reported that according to patients and healthcare professionals in breast cancer and nephrology trials, teams conducting the trials got their choice of primary outcome wrong (72% of the time) more often than they got it right (28% of the time). A Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) representative, co-author of this letter, asked (on Twitter) whether PPI contributors had been involved in the design of the original trials and by extension the outcome selection. The purpose of this study was to answer this question.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The chronic complications of ageing with HIV are not well studied in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) where general healthcare resources are limited. We aimed to collaborate with individuals living with HIV aged ≥ 50 years, and community elders (aged ≥ 60 years) living with non-communicable diseases in the Kilimanjaro region of Tanzania in a health research priority-setting exercise. METHODS: We conducted structured workshops based on broad questions to aid discussion and group-based patient priority setting, alongside discussion of the feasibility of future community research engagement. Participant priorities were tallied and ranked to arrive at core priorities from consensus discussion. RESULTS: Thirty older people living with HIV and 30 community elders attended separate priority setting workshops. Both groups reported motivation to participate in, conduct, and oversee future studies. In this resource-limited setting, basic needs such as healthcare access were prioritised much higher than specific HIV-complications or chronic disease. Stigma and social isolation were highly prioritised in those living with HIV. CONCLUSIONS: Community engagement and involvement in HIV and ageing research appears feasible in Tanzania. Ageing and non-communicable disease research should consider the wider context, and lack of basic needs in low-income settings. A greater impact may be achieved with community involvement.

The population in sub-Saharan Africa is ageing. The majority of people living with HIV infection also live in Africa, and they are ageing now that treatment is widely available. Current research on the chronic complications of ageing with and without HIV in sub-Saharan Africa is very limited, meaning that little is known on how to improve symptoms. In this pilot study, researchers from Tanzania and the UK worked with older people living with HIV, and community elders in Tanzania in a health research priority-setting exercise. Thirty older people living with HIV and thirty community elders attended workshops where they listed issues important to them, and then voted for each item as a group. Priorities were ranked in order of importance by adding up the number of votes. We also asked how interested and motivated older people were to work jointly with academic researchers and what might help and support them to do this. Both groups reported that they felt very motivated to participate in, conduct and oversee future research studies. A key finding was that basic needs, such as being able to see a doctor regularly and buying medications, were prioritised much higher than specific HIV-complications or chronic disease. Stigma and social isolation were important issues for older people with HIV. Our pilot findings suggest that meeting basic needs should be a key part of future work on living and ageing with chronic disease in Tanzania. The importance of working with patients and communities is also highlighted.

RESUMEN

Background: People with genetic predispositions to cancer are faced with complex health decisions about managing their risk. Decision aids can support informed, values-based decisions, alongside shared decision-making with a clinician. Whilst diagnoses of genetic predispositions to cancer are increasing, there is no scalable decision aid to support these people. This paper presents an accessible, relevant decision aid template which can be adapted for different predispositions to cancer. Methods: The decision aid template was co-developed with 12 patients affected by cancer and informed by empirical and theoretical literature. In addition, consultations were conducted with a further 19 people with Lynch syndrome; a specific genetic predisposition to cancer. Clinical stakeholders were consulted regularly. Coulter's framework for decision aid development guided the process, and these activities were complemented by the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, and the latest evidence on communicating risk in decision aids. Programme theory was developed to hypothesise how the decision aid would support decision-making and contextual factors which could influence the process. Guiding principles co-developed with the patient panel described how the decision aid could effectively engage people. Results: The in-depth co-design process led to the identification of five core components of an accessible decision aid template for people with a genetic predisposition to cancer: defining the decision; option grid showing implications of each option; optional further details such as icon arrays to show tailored risk and personal narratives; values clarification activity; and a summary to facilitate discussion with a clinician. Specific guidance was produced describing how to develop each component. The guiding principles identified that the decision aid template needed to promote trust, reduce distress, and be comprehensive, personally relevant and accessible in order to engage people. Conclusion: Adopting a co-design process helped ensure that the decision aid components were relevant and accessible to the target population. The template could have widespread application through being adapted for different genetic predispositions. The exact content should be co-designed with people from diverse backgrounds with lived experience of the specific predisposition to ensure it is as useful, engaging and relevant as possible.

RESUMEN

Global concern about problematic usage of the internet (PUI), and its public health and societal costs, continues to grow, sharpened in focus under the privations of the COVID-19 pandemic. This narrative review reports the expert opinions of members of the largest international network of researchers on PUI in the framework of the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action (CA 16207), on the scientific progress made and the critical knowledge gaps remaining to be filled as the term of the Action reaches its conclusion. A key advance has been achieving consensus on the clinical definition of various forms of PUI. Based on the overarching public health principles of protecting individuals and the public from harm and promoting the highest attainable standard of health, the World Health Organisation has introduced several new structured diagnoses into the ICD-11, including gambling disorder, gaming disorder, compulsive sexual behaviour disorder, and other unspecified or specified disorders due to addictive behaviours, alongside naming online activity as a diagnostic specifier. These definitions provide for the first time a sound platform for developing systematic networked research into various forms of PUI at global scale. Progress has also been made in areas such as refining and simplifying some of the available assessment instruments, clarifying the underpinning brain-based and social determinants, and building more empirically based etiological models, as a basis for therapeutic intervention, alongside public engagement initiatives. However, important gaps in our knowledge remain to be tackled. Principal among these include a better understanding of the course and evolution of the PUI-related problems, across different age groups, genders and other specific vulnerable groups, reliable methods for early identification of individuals at risk (before PUI becomes disordered), efficacious preventative and therapeutic interventions and ethical health and social policy changes that adequately safeguard human digital rights. The paper concludes with recommendations for achievable research goals, based on longitudinal analysis of a large multinational cohort co-designed with public stakeholders.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Research literature published during the COVID-19 pandemic highlights the loss of involvement opportunities for people with lived experience during the pandemic as well as the vital role lived experience advisors play at all times, including highlighting unseen aspects of the impacts of crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, researchers from the Closing the Gap Network (CtG) at the University of York worked to expand and diversify patient and public involvement (PPI) whist working on a study exploring the impact of the pandemic and associated restrictions on those with the most severe forms of mental ill health. CtG had a strong record of patient and public involvement pre-pandemic and researchers wanted to ensure that this continued during the pandemic. This paper describes the experience of lived experience involvement during the pandemic from multiple perspectives and makes recommendations for future involvement models, accessibility and recommendations for future research.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: 'Getting Involved in Research' was co-created and delivered by a multi-organisational group to provide an accessible introduction to research for those with lived experience of health and social care services. METHOD: The evaluation of participants' perceptions adopted an exploratory mixed method research design and aimed to gather data to provide an in-depth understanding of the participants' experience of 'Getting Involved in Research' through the co-researchers' analysis of qualitative data using Participatory Theme Elicitation (PTE). PTE was used with the qualitative data to promote co-analysis by the course development group; analyses from an independent academic was also used to further validate the method of PTE. RESULTS: Thirty-five participants in total participated in 'Getting Involved in Research'. Age ranges varied from 19 to 73 years old. Participants were predominately female (n = 24), five males participated (n = 5) and there was one participant who identified as non-binary (n = 1). Six core themes were identified using the PTE approach: (1) A Meaningful Participatory Approach (2) Increasing the Confidence of Participants (3) Interactive Online Format (4) An Ambient Learning Environment (5) A Desire for Future Courses (6) A Balance of Course Content and Discussion. Participants in 'Getting Involved in Research' reported that the content of the training was applicable, relevant, fostered awareness of research methods and anticipated that it would support their involvement in research. CONCLUSION: 'Getting Involved in Research' has contributed innovatively to the evidence base for how to engage with and motivate those who have experience of health and social care to become actively involved in research. This study demonstrates that 'Getting Involved in Research' may be helpful to train those with lived experience and their care partners however, further research following up on the application of the course learning would be required to ascertain effectiveness. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Future research should explore methods to apply research skills in practice to further develop participants' confidence in using the skills gained through 'Getting Involved in Research'.

The aim of this study was to gather information to help us understand the experience of participants' undertaking a research course called 'Getting Involved in Research'. A group of individuals including those with lived experience of health and social care services, academics, community and voluntary sector workers and a representative from the Department of Health in Northern Ireland worked together to develop a course to encourage and support people to engage with research. The 'Getting Involved in Research', course was designed to provide an understandable introduction to research for those people with lived experience of health and social care. We did this because research in health and social care sector should involve the patients and public who it is intended to help. The evaluation of the course had two distinct phases; we asked course participants to complete a survey before and after the course (pre- and post-course survey) and also asked them to complete a journal reflecting on their experiences after each lecture. This paper gives an overview of the profile of course participants and their responses to the survey questions. The survey answers were analysed using an approach to analysing information which encourages involvement from people with a range of experience of research methods, (known as Participatory Theme Elicitation). Thirty-five participants in total participated in 'Getting Involved in Research'. Age ranges varied from 19 to 73 years old. Participants were predominately female (n = 24), five males participated (n = 5) and there was one participant who identified as non-binary (n = 1). Participants in 'Getting Involved in Research' reported that the content of the course was relevant, encouraged awareness of research methods and encourage their future involvement in research.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study explored self-reported knowledge and interest to learn more about medicines research, development and health technology assessment among Finnish general public. It also aimed to define possible knowledge gaps and needs for public education regarding these topics. DESIGN: Online survey with 503 participants. The questionnaire was originally developed as a part of the Needs Assessment Work Package of the European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation Project. The survey was carried out in Finland in 2019. METHODS: The survey was conducted as an online survey by Kantar TNS Gallup Forum online panel. The data were analysed by using the freely available programming language R. Relationships between the demographic characteristics (such as age, gender and education level) of respondents and their knowledge or interest in medicines research and development were determined using Pearson's χ2 tests. Statistically significant responses of demographic characteristics in the respondents' knowledge or interest in medicines research were determined by logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 503 respondents (age 16-64) only 12% reported having good or very good knowledge of medicines research and development in general. Regarding health technology assessment, pharmacoeconomics and regulation, the percentage of respondents reporting good or very good knowledge was as low as 8%. Respondents were most interested in learning more about predictive and personalised medicine (47%) and least interested in medicines regulation (30%) and pharmacoeconomics (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported knowledge about medicines research and development and health technology assessment appears to be very low in Finland. Patient and public participation is recognised as an important and essential element in up-to-date medical research and assessment of new treatments. In order to participate as an active and equal partner in these processes, the public needs more information and education in these topics.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Schizophrenia was initially defined as "dementia praecox" by E. Kraepelin, which implies progressive deterioration. However, recent studies have revealed that early effective intervention may lead to social and functional recovery in schizophrenia. In this review, we provide an overview of current concepts in schizophrenia and pathophysiological hypotheses. In addition, we present recent findings from clinical and basic research on schizophrenia. Recent neuroimaging and neurophysiological studies have consistently revealed specific biological differences in the structure and function of the brain in those with schizophrenia. From a basic research perspective, to determine the essential pathophysiology underlying schizophrenia, it is crucial that findings from all lines of inquiry-induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived neural cells from patients, murine models expressing genetic mutations identified in patients, and patient clinical data-be integrated to contextualize the analysis results. However, the findings remain insufficient to serve as a diagnostic tool or a biomarker for predicting schizophrenia-related outcomes. Collaborations to conduct clinical research based on the patients' and their families' values are just beginning, and further development is expected.

Asunto(s)