Cargando…
Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review
BACKGROUND: Showing how engagement adds value for all stakeholders can be an effective motivator for broader implementation of patient engagement. However, it is unclear what methods can best be used to evaluate patient engagement. This paper is focused on ways to evaluate patient engagement at thre...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6978865/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31489988 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12951 |
_version_ | 1783490789273239552 |
---|---|
author | Vat, Lidewij Eva Finlay, Teresa Jan Schuitmaker‐Warnaar, Tjerk Fahy, Nick Robinson, Paul Boudes, Mathieu Diaz, Ana Ferrer, Elisa Hivert, Virginie Purman, Gabor Kürzinger, Marie‐Laure Kroes, Robert A. Hey, Claudia Broerse, Jacqueline E.W. |
author_facet | Vat, Lidewij Eva Finlay, Teresa Jan Schuitmaker‐Warnaar, Tjerk Fahy, Nick Robinson, Paul Boudes, Mathieu Diaz, Ana Ferrer, Elisa Hivert, Virginie Purman, Gabor Kürzinger, Marie‐Laure Kroes, Robert A. Hey, Claudia Broerse, Jacqueline E.W. |
author_sort | Vat, Lidewij Eva |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Showing how engagement adds value for all stakeholders can be an effective motivator for broader implementation of patient engagement. However, it is unclear what methods can best be used to evaluate patient engagement. This paper is focused on ways to evaluate patient engagement at three decision‐making points in the medicines research and development process: research priority setting, clinical trial design and early dialogues with regulators and health technology assessment bodies. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to review the literature on monitoring and evaluation of patient engagement, with a focus on indicators and methods. SEARCH STRATEGY AND INCLUSION CRITERIA: We undertook a scoping literature review using a systematic search, including academic and grey literature with a focus on evaluation approaches or outcomes associated with patient engagement. No date limits were applied other than a cut‐off of publications after July 2018. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted from 91 publications, coded and thematically analysed. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 18 benefits and 5 costs of patient engagement were identified, mapped with 28 possible indicators for their evaluation. Several quantitative and qualitative methods were found for the evaluation of benefits and costs of patient engagement. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Currently available indicators and methods are of some use in measuring impact but are not sufficient to understand the pathway to impact, nor whether interaction between researchers and patients leads to change. We suggest that the impacts of patient engagement can best be determined not by applying single indicators, but a coherent set of measures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6978865 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69788652020-02-01 Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review Vat, Lidewij Eva Finlay, Teresa Jan Schuitmaker‐Warnaar, Tjerk Fahy, Nick Robinson, Paul Boudes, Mathieu Diaz, Ana Ferrer, Elisa Hivert, Virginie Purman, Gabor Kürzinger, Marie‐Laure Kroes, Robert A. Hey, Claudia Broerse, Jacqueline E.W. Health Expect Review Articles BACKGROUND: Showing how engagement adds value for all stakeholders can be an effective motivator for broader implementation of patient engagement. However, it is unclear what methods can best be used to evaluate patient engagement. This paper is focused on ways to evaluate patient engagement at three decision‐making points in the medicines research and development process: research priority setting, clinical trial design and early dialogues with regulators and health technology assessment bodies. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to review the literature on monitoring and evaluation of patient engagement, with a focus on indicators and methods. SEARCH STRATEGY AND INCLUSION CRITERIA: We undertook a scoping literature review using a systematic search, including academic and grey literature with a focus on evaluation approaches or outcomes associated with patient engagement. No date limits were applied other than a cut‐off of publications after July 2018. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted from 91 publications, coded and thematically analysed. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 18 benefits and 5 costs of patient engagement were identified, mapped with 28 possible indicators for their evaluation. Several quantitative and qualitative methods were found for the evaluation of benefits and costs of patient engagement. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Currently available indicators and methods are of some use in measuring impact but are not sufficient to understand the pathway to impact, nor whether interaction between researchers and patients leads to change. We suggest that the impacts of patient engagement can best be determined not by applying single indicators, but a coherent set of measures. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-09-06 2020-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6978865/ /pubmed/31489988 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12951 Text en © 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd 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 | Review Articles Vat, Lidewij Eva Finlay, Teresa Jan Schuitmaker‐Warnaar, Tjerk Fahy, Nick Robinson, Paul Boudes, Mathieu Diaz, Ana Ferrer, Elisa Hivert, Virginie Purman, Gabor Kürzinger, Marie‐Laure Kroes, Robert A. Hey, Claudia Broerse, Jacqueline E.W. Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review |
title | Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review |
title_full | Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review |
title_short | Evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: A literature review |
title_sort | evaluating the “return on patient engagement initiatives” in medicines research and development: a literature review |
topic | Review Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6978865/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31489988 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hex.12951 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vatlidewijeva evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT finlayteresa evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT janschuitmakerwarnaartjerk evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT fahynick evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT robinsonpaul evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT boudesmathieu evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT diazana evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT ferrerelisa evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT hivertvirginie evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT purmangabor evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT kurzingermarielaure evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT kroesroberta evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT heyclaudia evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview AT broersejacquelineew evaluatingthereturnonpatientengagementinitiativesinmedicinesresearchanddevelopmentaliteraturereview |