Cargando…
Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prehospital critical care for out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a complex and largely unproven intervention. During research to examine this intervention, we noted significant differences in stakeholders' views about research, randomisation, and the funding of prehos...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6266350/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30623101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.78 |
_version_ | 1783375819457953792 |
---|---|
author | von Vopelius‐Feldt, Johannes Brandling, Janet Benger, Jonathan |
author_facet | von Vopelius‐Feldt, Johannes Brandling, Janet Benger, Jonathan |
author_sort | von Vopelius‐Feldt, Johannes |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prehospital critical care for out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a complex and largely unproven intervention. During research to examine this intervention, we noted significant differences in stakeholders' views about research, randomisation, and the funding of prehospital critical care for OHCA. We aimed to answer the following questions: What are stakeholders' priorities for prehospital research? What are stakeholders' views on randomisation of prehospital critical care? How do stakeholders consider allocation of resources in prehospital care? METHODS: We undertook an explanatory qualitative framework analysis of interviews and focus group with 5 key stakeholder groups: patients and public, air ambulance charities, ambulance service commissioners, prehospital researchers, and prehospital critical care providers. RESULTS: We undertook 3 focus group discussions with a total of 23 participants and 8 interviews with a total of 9 participants. Despite sharing a common appreciation of the concepts of scientific enquiry, fairness, and beneficence, the 5 relevant stakeholder groups displayed divergent views of research and funding strategies regarding the intervention of prehospital critical care for the condition of OHCA. The reasons for this divergence could largely be explained through the different personal experiences and situational contexts of each stakeholder group. Many aspects of the strategies suggested by the stakeholder groups only partially aligned with principles of traditional evidence‐based medicine, but were held with strong conviction. DISCUSSION: Analysis of the views of 5 stakeholder groups regarding research and the funding of prehospital critical care for OHCA revealed shared values but a variety of different strategies to achieve these. This knowledge can help researchers in similar fields in the planning and presentation of their research, to maximise impact on decision making. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6266350 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62663502019-01-08 Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study von Vopelius‐Feldt, Johannes Brandling, Janet Benger, Jonathan Health Sci Rep Research Articles BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Prehospital critical care for out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is a complex and largely unproven intervention. During research to examine this intervention, we noted significant differences in stakeholders' views about research, randomisation, and the funding of prehospital critical care for OHCA. We aimed to answer the following questions: What are stakeholders' priorities for prehospital research? What are stakeholders' views on randomisation of prehospital critical care? How do stakeholders consider allocation of resources in prehospital care? METHODS: We undertook an explanatory qualitative framework analysis of interviews and focus group with 5 key stakeholder groups: patients and public, air ambulance charities, ambulance service commissioners, prehospital researchers, and prehospital critical care providers. RESULTS: We undertook 3 focus group discussions with a total of 23 participants and 8 interviews with a total of 9 participants. Despite sharing a common appreciation of the concepts of scientific enquiry, fairness, and beneficence, the 5 relevant stakeholder groups displayed divergent views of research and funding strategies regarding the intervention of prehospital critical care for the condition of OHCA. The reasons for this divergence could largely be explained through the different personal experiences and situational contexts of each stakeholder group. Many aspects of the strategies suggested by the stakeholder groups only partially aligned with principles of traditional evidence‐based medicine, but were held with strong conviction. DISCUSSION: Analysis of the views of 5 stakeholder groups regarding research and the funding of prehospital critical care for OHCA revealed shared values but a variety of different strategies to achieve these. This knowledge can help researchers in similar fields in the planning and presentation of their research, to maximise impact on decision making. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6266350/ /pubmed/30623101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.78 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Health Science Reports published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles von Vopelius‐Feldt, Johannes Brandling, Janet Benger, Jonathan Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study |
title | Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study |
title_full | Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study |
title_fullStr | Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study |
title_full_unstemmed | Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study |
title_short | Variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: An exploratory study |
title_sort | variations in stakeholders' priorities and views on randomisation and funding decisions in out‐of‐hospital cardiac arrest: an exploratory study |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6266350/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30623101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.78 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vonvopeliusfeldtjohannes variationsinstakeholdersprioritiesandviewsonrandomisationandfundingdecisionsinoutofhospitalcardiacarrestanexploratorystudy AT brandlingjanet variationsinstakeholdersprioritiesandviewsonrandomisationandfundingdecisionsinoutofhospitalcardiacarrestanexploratorystudy AT bengerjonathan variationsinstakeholdersprioritiesandviewsonrandomisationandfundingdecisionsinoutofhospitalcardiacarrestanexploratorystudy |