Introducing patient perspective in health technology assessment at the local level

Gagnon, Marie‐Pierre; Lepage-Savary, Dolorès; Gagnon, Johanne; St-Pierre, Michèle; Simard, Chantale; Rhainds, Marc; Lemieux, Renald; Gauvin, François-Pierre; Desmartis, Marie

doi:10.1186/1472-6963-9-54

Cited by 37 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Beyond local and national boundaries, the KE-DS Model illustrates the importance of involving pertinent stakeholders throughout all stages in order to maximize effective KE (Gagnon et al, 2009). Knowledge of and attention to the beliefs and values of the communities being served allowed program leads to tailor the development and implementation processes to these identified needs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A structured approach to knowledge exchange: Understanding the implementation of a cancer survivor program

Kazanjian

Smillie

Howard

et al. 2012

European Journal of Oncology Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-The purpose of this research was to describe the application of a model of knowledge exchange, the Knowledge Exchange-Decision Support (KE-DS) Model, to the Canadian pilot of Cancer Transitions, a psychosocial program for cancer survivors.Method-We compared and contrasted the program planning and implementation processes across three diverse sites offering Cancer Transitions. The KE-DS Model guided the collection and analysis of observations and written data according to specific model components.Results-The use of the KE-DS Model highlighted four pertinent factors that influenced knowledge exchange during planning and implementation processes of this psychosocial program. First, the geographic diversity of where these programs were offered affected strategies for program promotion, recruitment and means of access. Second, the variation of the professional and organizational capacity of the three sites was critical to program planning and delivery. Third, cultural values and norms shaped each site's approach. Fourth, the KE-DS Model identified populations who were included and excluded from participation.Conclusions-The KE-DS Model was useful in elucidating the processes of knowledge exchange during the planning and implementing of an intervention for survivor care. This process information will inform future offerings of Cancer Transitions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A structured approach to knowledge exchange: Understanding the implementation of a cancer survivor program

Kazanjian

Smillie

Howard

et al. 2012

European Journal of Oncology Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The search for biomarkers lies, as we have already noted, at the heart of translational 19 Gagnon et al 45 Grocott et al 22 …”

Section: The Ethical Argumentmentioning

confidence: 98%

Close to the bench as well as at the bedside: involving service users in all phases of translational research

Callard

Rose

Wykes

2011

Health Expectations

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The paper aims to develop a model of translational research in which service user and other stakeholder involvement are central to each phase.Background ÔTranslationalÕ is the current medical buzzword: translational research has been termed Ôbench to bedsideÕ research and promises to fast-track biomedical advances in the service of patient benefit. Models usually conceive of translational research as a ÔpipelineÕ that is divided into phases: the early phase is characterized as the province of basic scientists and laboratory-based clinical researchers; the later phases focus on the implementation, dissemination and diffusion of health applications. If service user involvement is mentioned, it is usually restricted to these later phases.

show abstract

“…Patients aspire to more horizontal and deliberative partnerships with researchers, which has resulted in a range of different patient roles. [1][2][3][4] Patients may be: committee members, reviewers of protocols or grant applications, advisors, panel members or research commissioners. Each patient role implies different tasks and different kinds of contributions, and roles can be performed at different levels of involvement.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating and inhibiting factors for long-term involvement of patients at outcome conferences—lessons learnt from a decade of collaboration in OMERACT: a qualitative study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveSeveral studies have provided insights into the conditions for successful patient involvement in health research. We recently demonstrated that long-term engagement with people with rheumatic conditions in international outcome research led to significant changes in the research agenda in the field of rheumatology. This article explores facilitating and inhibiting factors for long-term involvement of patients as collaborative partners at five Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) conferences.DesignResponsive evaluation, starting with a thematic document analysis of conference proceedings and the grey literature, followed by 38 qualitative interviews. Interview transcripts were subjected to inductive content analysis.Setting5 international OMERACT conferences between 2002 and 2012.ParticipantsPatient delegates (n=16) and professional delegates representing researchers (n=14), pharmaceutical industry and regulators (n=2).ResultsCombined review of the document analysis and interview data revealed five main facilitators and three main barriers. Patient engagement as full participants at OMERACT conferences was enhanced by: strong leadership commitment and the presence of change agents, a clear selection procedure, an inclusive consensus-based conference design, individualised and self-organised support, an interactive and encouraging moderation style during discussion groups. Barriers were related to the intensity of the conference programme, scepticism among researchers and doubts about the representativeness of the patient group.ConclusionsThis study concludes that developing a sustainable structure for funding, selection and support of patient delegates, as well as adjusting conference design and moderation style, contributes not only towards facilitating direct dialogue between all stakeholders but also towards enhancing mutual understanding and the successful incorporation of the patient perspective in an outcome conference such as OMERACT.

show abstract

Introducing patient perspective in health technology assessment at the local level

Cited by 37 publications

References 44 publications

A structured approach to knowledge exchange: Understanding the implementation of a cancer survivor program

A structured approach to knowledge exchange: Understanding the implementation of a cancer survivor program

Close to the bench as well as at the bedside: involving service users in all phases of translational research

Facilitating and inhibiting factors for long-term involvement of patients at outcome conferences—lessons learnt from a decade of collaboration in OMERACT: a qualitative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About