How to plan, do and report patient and public involvement in research

Partridge, A; Hitchman, J; Savic, Louise; Shelton, Cliff

doi:10.1111/anae.15901

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to this belief, one fifth of the groups (23%) do not include patients in their research activity yet, and almost the same number of groups (19%) do not plan to do so. This finding demonstrates the inexperience, uncertainty and lack of specific structure of some GCIG groups in how to start effective collaboration with their patients, regardless of the fact that many recommendations to do so can be found in literature 10,24,29–35 . Understanding the reasons of limited patient involvement may help overcome barriers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…This finding demonstrates the inexperience, uncertainty and lack of specific structure of some GCIG groups in how to start effective collaboration with their patients, regardless of the fact that many recommendations to do so can be found in literature. 10,24,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Understanding the reasons of limited patient involvement may help overcome barriers.…”

Section: Twentymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Nohová,

Andrews,

Votan

et al. 2023

Health Science Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and AimsInvolving 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.MethodsIn 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.ResultsMore 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.ConclusionEven 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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%