LIVIVO - The Search Portal for Life Sciences

zur deutschen Oberfläche wechseln
Advanced search

Search results

Result 1 - 3 of total 3

Search options

  1. Article ; Online: A scoping review to identify and describe the characteristics of theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships

    B. J. Tittlemier / J. Cooper / D. Steliga / R. L. Woodgate / K. M. Sibley

    Health Research Policy and Systems, Vol 20, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    2022  Volume 19

    Abstract: Abstract Background Engaging users of health research, namely knowledge users, as partners in the research process may to lead to evidence that is more relevant to the users. This may optimize the uptake of evidence in healthcare practice, resulting in ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Background Engaging users of health research, namely knowledge users, as partners in the research process may to lead to evidence that is more relevant to the users. This may optimize the uptake of evidence in healthcare practice, resulting in improved health outcomes or more efficient healthcare systems. However, barriers to involving knowledge users in the research process exist. Theories, models and frameworks may help guide the process of involving knowledge users and address barriers to engaging with knowledge users in research; however, there is little evidence identifying or describing the theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships. Objectives Identify and describe theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships. Report on concepts of knowledge user engagement represented in identified theories, models and frameworks. Methods We conducted a scoping review. Database (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PCORI) and ancestry and snowball searches were utilized. Included articles were written in English, published between January 2005 and June 2021, specific to health, a research partnership, and referred to a theory, model or framework. No critical appraisal was conducted. We developed a coding framework to extract details related to the publication (e.g. country, year) and theory, model or framework (e.g. intended users, theoretical underpinning, methodology, methods of development, purpose, concepts of knowledge user engagement). One reviewer conducted data extraction. Descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were utilized to report the results. Results We identified 21 874 articles in screening. Thirty-nine models or frameworks were included in data analysis, but no theory. Two models or frameworks (5%) were underpinned by theory. Literature review was the method (n = 11, 28%) most frequently used to develop a model or framework. Guiding or managing a partnership was the most frequently reported purpose of the model/framework (n = 14, 36%). The most represented ...
    Keywords Frameworks ; Knowledge translation ; Models ; Research partnerships ; Theories ; Public aspects of medicine ; RA1-1270
    Subject code 306
    Language English
    Publishing date 2022-06-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    Inter-library loan at ZB MED

    Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

  2. Article ; Online: A review of reviews on principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts of research partnerships approaches

    F. Hoekstra / K. J. Mrklas / M. Khan / R. C. McKay / M. Vis-Dunbar / K. M. Sibley / T. Nguyen / I. D. Graham / SCI Guiding Principles Consensus Panel / H. L. Gainforth

    Health Research Policy and Systems, Vol 18, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    a first step in synthesising the research partnership literature

    2020  Volume 23

    Abstract: Abstract Background Conducting research in partnership with stakeholders (e.g. policy-makers, practitioners, organisations, patients) is a promising and popular approach to improving the implementation of research findings in policy and practice. This ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Background Conducting research in partnership with stakeholders (e.g. policy-makers, practitioners, organisations, patients) is a promising and popular approach to improving the implementation of research findings in policy and practice. This study aimed to identify the principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts reported in different types of reviews of research partnerships in order to obtain a better understanding of the scope of the research partnership literature. Methods This review of reviews is part of a Coordinated Multicenter Team approach to synthesise the research partnership literature with five conceptually linked literature reviews. The main research question was ‘What principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts are reported in different types of research partnership approaches?’. We included articles describing a literature review of research partnerships using a systematic search strategy. We used an adapted version of the Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool to assess quality. Nine electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2018. Principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts were extracted from the included reviews and analysed using direct content analysis. Results We included 86 reviews using terms describing several research partnership approaches (e.g. community-based participatory research, participatory research, integrated knowledge translation). After the analyses, we synthesised 17 overarching principles and 11 overarching strategies and grouped them into one of the following subcategories: relationship between partners; co-production of knowledge; meaningful stakeholder engagement; capacity-building, support and resources; communication process; and ethical issues related to the collaborative research activities. Similarly, we synthesised 20 overarching outcomes and impacts on researchers, stakeholders, the community or society, and the research process. Conclusions This review of reviews is the first that presents overarching principles, strategies, outcomes and impacts of research partnerships. This review is unique in scope as we synthesised literature across multiple research areas, involving different stakeholder groups. Our findings can be used as a first step to guide the initiation and maintenance of research partnerships and to create a classification system of the key domains of research partnerships, which may improve reporting consistency in the research partnership literature. Trial registration This study is registered via Open Science Framework: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GVR7Y .
    Keywords Collaborative research partnerships ; Integrated knowledge translation ; Community-based participatory research ; Stakeholder engagement ; Research principles and strategies ; Research outcomes and impact ; Public aspects of medicine ; RA1-1270
    Subject code 306
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-05-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    Inter-library loan at ZB MED

    Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

  3. Article ; Online: Valuing All Voices

    P. Roche / C. Shimmin / S. Hickes / M. Khan / O. Sherzoi / E. Wicklund / J. G. Lavoie / S. Hardie / K. D. M. Wittmeier / K. M. Sibley

    Research Involvement and Engagement, Vol 6, Iss 1, Pp 1-

    refining a trauma-informed, intersectional and critical reflexive framework for patient engagement in health research using a qualitative descriptive approach

    2020  Volume 13

    Abstract: Abstract Background Critical stakeholder-identified gaps in current health research engagement strategies include the exclusion of voices traditionally less heard and a lack of consideration for the role of trauma in lived experience. Previous work has ... ...

    Abstract Abstract Background Critical stakeholder-identified gaps in current health research engagement strategies include the exclusion of voices traditionally less heard and a lack of consideration for the role of trauma in lived experience. Previous work has advocated for a trauma-informed, intersectional, and critical reflexive approach to patient and public involvement in health research. The Valuing All Voices Framework embodies these theoretical concepts through four key components: trust, self-awareness, empathy, and relationship building. The goal of this framework is to provide the context for research teams to conduct patient engagement through the use of a social justice and health equity lens, to improve safety and inclusivity in health research. The aim of this study was to revise the proposed Valuing All Voices Framework with members of groups whose voices are traditionally less heard in health research. Methods A qualitative descriptive approach was used to conduct a thematic analysis of participant input on the proposed framework. Methods were co-developed with a patient co-researcher and community organizations. Results Group and individual interviews were held with 18 participants identifying as Inuit; refugee, immigrant, and/or newcomer; and/or as a person with lived experience of a mental health condition. Participants supported the proposed framework and underlying theory. Participant definitions of framework components included characterizations, behaviours, feelings, motivations, and ways to put components into action during engagement. Emphasis was placed on the need for a holistic approach to engagement; focusing on open and honest communication; building trusting relationships that extend beyond the research process; and capacity development for both researchers and patient partners. Participants suggested changes that incorporated some of their definitions; simplified and contextualized proposed component definitions; added a component of “education and communication”; and added a ‘how to’ section for each component. The framework was revised according to participant suggestions and validated through member checking. Conclusions The revised Valuing All Voices Framework provides guidance for teams looking to employ trauma-informed approaches, intersectional analysis, and critical reflexive practice in the co-development of meaningful, inclusive, and safe engagement strategies. Plain English Summary Patient engagement in health research continues to exclude many people who face challenges in accessing healthcare, including (but not limited to) First Nations, Inuit, and Metis people; immigrants, refugees, and newcomers; and people with lived experience of a mental health condition. We proposed a new guide to help researchers engage with patients and members of the public in research decision-making in a meaningful, inclusive, and safe way. We called this the Valuing All Voices Framework, and met with people who identify as members of some of these groups to help define the key parts of the framework (trust; self-awareness; empathy; and relationship building), to tell us what they liked and disliked about the proposed framework, and what needed to be changed. Input from participants was used to change the framework, including clarifying definitions of the key parts, adding another key part called “education and communication”, and providing action items so teams can put these key parts into practice.
    Keywords Patient engagement ; Patient and public involvement ; Qualitative ; Health research ; Trauma-informed ; Intersectional analysis ; Medicine ; R ; Medicine (General) ; R5-920
    Subject code 360
    Language English
    Publishing date 2020-07-01T00:00:00Z
    Publisher BMC
    Document type Article ; Online
    Database BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (life sciences selection)

    Full text online

    More links

    Kategorien

    Inter-library loan at ZB MED

    Your chosen title can be delivered directly to ZB MED Cologne location if you are registered as a user at ZB MED Cologne.

To top