Cargando…

Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues

BACKGROUND: The value proposition of including patients at each step of the research process is that patient perspectives and preferences can have a positive impact on both the science and the outcomes of comparative effectiveness research. How to accomplish engagement and the extent to which approa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kimminau, Kim S., Jernigan, Cheryl, LeMaster, Joseph, Aaronson, Lauren S., Christopher, Myra, Ahmed, Syed, Boivin, Antoine, DeFino, Mia, Greenlee, Robert, Salvalaggio, Ginetta, Hendricks, Deborah, Herbert, Carol, Mabachi, Natabhona M., Macaulay, Ann, Westfall, John M., Waitman, Lemuel R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6136947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30074952
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000772
_version_ 1783355093496627200
author Kimminau, Kim S.
Jernigan, Cheryl
LeMaster, Joseph
Aaronson, Lauren S.
Christopher, Myra
Ahmed, Syed
Boivin, Antoine
DeFino, Mia
Greenlee, Robert
Salvalaggio, Ginetta
Hendricks, Deborah
Herbert, Carol
Mabachi, Natabhona M.
Macaulay, Ann
Westfall, John M.
Waitman, Lemuel R.
author_facet Kimminau, Kim S.
Jernigan, Cheryl
LeMaster, Joseph
Aaronson, Lauren S.
Christopher, Myra
Ahmed, Syed
Boivin, Antoine
DeFino, Mia
Greenlee, Robert
Salvalaggio, Ginetta
Hendricks, Deborah
Herbert, Carol
Mabachi, Natabhona M.
Macaulay, Ann
Westfall, John M.
Waitman, Lemuel R.
author_sort Kimminau, Kim S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The value proposition of including patients at each step of the research process is that patient perspectives and preferences can have a positive impact on both the science and the outcomes of comparative effectiveness research. How to accomplish engagement and the extent to which approaches to community engagement inform strategies for effective patient engagement need to be examined to address conducting and accelerating comparative effectiveness research. OBJECTIVES: To examine how various perspectives and diverse training lead investigators and patients to conflicting positions on how best to advance patient engagement. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative methods were used to collect perspectives and models of engagement from a diverse group of patients, researchers and clinicians. The project culminated with a workshop involving these stakeholders. The workshop used a novel approach, combining World Café and Future Search techniques, to compare and contrast aspects of patient engagement and community engagement. SUBJECTS: Participants included patients, researchers, and clinicians. MEASURES: Group and workshop discussions provided the consensus on topics related to patient and community engagement. RESULTS: Participants developed and refined a framework that compares and contrasts features associated with patient and community engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Although patient and community engagement may share a similar approach to engagement based on trust and mutual benefit, there may be distinctive aspects that require a unique lexicon, strategies, tactics, and activities.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6136947
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61369472018-09-28 Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues Kimminau, Kim S. Jernigan, Cheryl LeMaster, Joseph Aaronson, Lauren S. Christopher, Myra Ahmed, Syed Boivin, Antoine DeFino, Mia Greenlee, Robert Salvalaggio, Ginetta Hendricks, Deborah Herbert, Carol Mabachi, Natabhona M. Macaulay, Ann Westfall, John M. Waitman, Lemuel R. Med Care Original Articles BACKGROUND: The value proposition of including patients at each step of the research process is that patient perspectives and preferences can have a positive impact on both the science and the outcomes of comparative effectiveness research. How to accomplish engagement and the extent to which approaches to community engagement inform strategies for effective patient engagement need to be examined to address conducting and accelerating comparative effectiveness research. OBJECTIVES: To examine how various perspectives and diverse training lead investigators and patients to conflicting positions on how best to advance patient engagement. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative methods were used to collect perspectives and models of engagement from a diverse group of patients, researchers and clinicians. The project culminated with a workshop involving these stakeholders. The workshop used a novel approach, combining World Café and Future Search techniques, to compare and contrast aspects of patient engagement and community engagement. SUBJECTS: Participants included patients, researchers, and clinicians. MEASURES: Group and workshop discussions provided the consensus on topics related to patient and community engagement. RESULTS: Participants developed and refined a framework that compares and contrasts features associated with patient and community engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Although patient and community engagement may share a similar approach to engagement based on trust and mutual benefit, there may be distinctive aspects that require a unique lexicon, strategies, tactics, and activities. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2018-10 2018-09-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6136947/ /pubmed/30074952 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000772 Text en Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle Original Articles
Kimminau, Kim S.
Jernigan, Cheryl
LeMaster, Joseph
Aaronson, Lauren S.
Christopher, Myra
Ahmed, Syed
Boivin, Antoine
DeFino, Mia
Greenlee, Robert
Salvalaggio, Ginetta
Hendricks, Deborah
Herbert, Carol
Mabachi, Natabhona M.
Macaulay, Ann
Westfall, John M.
Waitman, Lemuel R.
Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues
title Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues
title_full Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues
title_fullStr Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues
title_full_unstemmed Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues
title_short Patient vs. Community Engagement: Emerging Issues
title_sort patient vs. community engagement: emerging issues
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6136947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30074952
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000000772
work_keys_str_mv AT kimminaukims patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT jernigancheryl patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT lemasterjoseph patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT aaronsonlaurens patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT christophermyra patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT ahmedsyed patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT boivinantoine patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT definomia patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT greenleerobert patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT salvalaggioginetta patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT hendricksdeborah patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT herbertcarol patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT mabachinatabhonam patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT macaulayann patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT westfalljohnm patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues
AT waitmanlemuelr patientvscommunityengagementemergingissues