Cargando…
Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process
People with lived experience are individuals who have first-hand experience of the medical condition(s) being considered. The value of including the viewpoints of people with lived experience in health policy, health care, and health care and systems research has been recognized at many levels, incl...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6915892/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31842842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0436-0 |
_version_ | 1783480116154728448 |
---|---|
author | Rittenbach, Katherine Horne, Candice G. O’Riordan, Terence Bichel, Allison Mitchell, Nicholas Fernandez Parra, Adriana M. MacMaster, Frank P. |
author_facet | Rittenbach, Katherine Horne, Candice G. O’Riordan, Terence Bichel, Allison Mitchell, Nicholas Fernandez Parra, Adriana M. MacMaster, Frank P. |
author_sort | Rittenbach, Katherine |
collection | PubMed |
description | People with lived experience are individuals who have first-hand experience of the medical condition(s) being considered. The value of including the viewpoints of people with lived experience in health policy, health care, and health care and systems research has been recognized at many levels, including by funding agencies. However, there is little guidance or established best practices on how to include non-academic reviewers in the grant review process. Here we describe our approach to the inclusion of people with lived experience in every stage of the grant review process. After a budget was created for a specific call, a steering committee was created. This group included researchers, people with lived experience, and health systems administrators. This group developed and issued the call. After receiving proposals, stage one was scientific review by researchers. Grants were ranked by this score and a short list then reviewed by people with lived experience as stage two. Finally, for stage three, the Steering Committee convened and achieved consensus based on information drawn from stages one and two. Our approach to engage people with lived experience in the grant review process was positively reviewed by everyone involved, as it allowed for patient perspectives to be truly integrated. However, it does lengthen the review process. The proposed model offers further practical insight into including people with lived experience in the review process. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6915892 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69158922019-12-30 Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process Rittenbach, Katherine Horne, Candice G. O’Riordan, Terence Bichel, Allison Mitchell, Nicholas Fernandez Parra, Adriana M. MacMaster, Frank P. BMC Med Ethics Debate People with lived experience are individuals who have first-hand experience of the medical condition(s) being considered. The value of including the viewpoints of people with lived experience in health policy, health care, and health care and systems research has been recognized at many levels, including by funding agencies. However, there is little guidance or established best practices on how to include non-academic reviewers in the grant review process. Here we describe our approach to the inclusion of people with lived experience in every stage of the grant review process. After a budget was created for a specific call, a steering committee was created. This group included researchers, people with lived experience, and health systems administrators. This group developed and issued the call. After receiving proposals, stage one was scientific review by researchers. Grants were ranked by this score and a short list then reviewed by people with lived experience as stage two. Finally, for stage three, the Steering Committee convened and achieved consensus based on information drawn from stages one and two. Our approach to engage people with lived experience in the grant review process was positively reviewed by everyone involved, as it allowed for patient perspectives to be truly integrated. However, it does lengthen the review process. The proposed model offers further practical insight into including people with lived experience in the review process. BioMed Central 2019-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6915892/ /pubmed/31842842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0436-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Debate Rittenbach, Katherine Horne, Candice G. O’Riordan, Terence Bichel, Allison Mitchell, Nicholas Fernandez Parra, Adriana M. MacMaster, Frank P. Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
title | Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
title_full | Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
title_fullStr | Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
title_full_unstemmed | Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
title_short | Engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
title_sort | engaging people with lived experience in the grant review process |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6915892/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31842842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12910-019-0436-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rittenbachkatherine engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess AT hornecandiceg engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess AT oriordanterence engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess AT bichelallison engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess AT mitchellnicholas engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess AT fernandezparraadrianam engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess AT macmasterfrankp engagingpeoplewithlivedexperienceinthegrantreviewprocess |