Cargando…
The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio
BACKGROUND: In July 2020 Cancer Research UK undertook a rapid review of the studies in its clinical research portfolio to assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. The review examined over 160 research studies funded by the charity, and in keeping with its usual practice, the charity involved pati...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8169392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34074346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00279-w |
_version_ | 1783702051862085632 |
---|---|
author | Croudass, Anne Stephens, Richard |
author_facet | Croudass, Anne Stephens, Richard |
author_sort | Croudass, Anne |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In July 2020 Cancer Research UK undertook a rapid review of the studies in its clinical research portfolio to assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. The review examined over 160 research studies funded by the charity, and in keeping with its usual practice, the charity involved patient/public contributors in the review process. MAIN BODY: Cancer Research UK (CRUK) spends over £450 million pa on research, including clinical trials, tissue collections, laboratory science and biomarker studies. It has involved patient/public contributors in clinical research funding decisions for ten years, recruiting volunteers from the National Cancer Research Institute’s (NCRI) Consumer Forum. The NCRI is a partnership of funders, including the 4 UK governments and major charities such as CRUK. Its Consumer Forum is a group of volunteers with personal experience of cancer as patients or carers, who are trained for and experienced in working on national strategic bodies as well as on individual research studies. The CRUK whole-portfolio review was held over a two-week period in a series of online meetings. A pair from the team of patient/public contributors was included in each meeting, and they made comments on every application reviewed as well as participating in reaching decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The process not only demonstrated CRUK’s continued commitment to involving patient/public contributors in their funding decisions, but also provided an opportunity for these contributors to take a holistic view of processes to inform future patient/public contribution in the charity’s work, as well as to influence the decisions about the individual studies being reviewed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8169392 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81693922021-06-02 The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio Croudass, Anne Stephens, Richard Res Involv Engagem Commentary BACKGROUND: In July 2020 Cancer Research UK undertook a rapid review of the studies in its clinical research portfolio to assess the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. The review examined over 160 research studies funded by the charity, and in keeping with its usual practice, the charity involved patient/public contributors in the review process. MAIN BODY: Cancer Research UK (CRUK) spends over £450 million pa on research, including clinical trials, tissue collections, laboratory science and biomarker studies. It has involved patient/public contributors in clinical research funding decisions for ten years, recruiting volunteers from the National Cancer Research Institute’s (NCRI) Consumer Forum. The NCRI is a partnership of funders, including the 4 UK governments and major charities such as CRUK. Its Consumer Forum is a group of volunteers with personal experience of cancer as patients or carers, who are trained for and experienced in working on national strategic bodies as well as on individual research studies. The CRUK whole-portfolio review was held over a two-week period in a series of online meetings. A pair from the team of patient/public contributors was included in each meeting, and they made comments on every application reviewed as well as participating in reaching decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The process not only demonstrated CRUK’s continued commitment to involving patient/public contributors in their funding decisions, but also provided an opportunity for these contributors to take a holistic view of processes to inform future patient/public contribution in the charity’s work, as well as to influence the decisions about the individual studies being reviewed. BioMed Central 2021-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8169392/ /pubmed/34074346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00279-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Commentary Croudass, Anne Stephens, Richard The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
title | The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
title_full | The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
title_fullStr | The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
title_full_unstemmed | The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
title_short | The value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research UK’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
title_sort | value of the patient and public contribution to cancer research uk’s review of covid-19 impact on its clinical research portfolio |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8169392/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34074346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00279-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT croudassanne thevalueofthepatientandpubliccontributiontocancerresearchuksreviewofcovid19impactonitsclinicalresearchportfolio AT stephensrichard thevalueofthepatientandpubliccontributiontocancerresearchuksreviewofcovid19impactonitsclinicalresearchportfolio AT croudassanne valueofthepatientandpubliccontributiontocancerresearchuksreviewofcovid19impactonitsclinicalresearchportfolio AT stephensrichard valueofthepatientandpubliccontributiontocancerresearchuksreviewofcovid19impactonitsclinicalresearchportfolio |