Cargando…
Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews
BACKGROUND: Scoping reviews of health research are increasing in popularity. However, only a minority of scoping reviews in this sector engage patients and caregivers as co-producers of the research. Despite developments in scoping review methodology, which insist that stakeholder consultation is es...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9210720/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35725640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40900-022-00361-x |
_version_ | 1784730215459586048 |
---|---|
author | Oravec, Nebojša Monnin, Caroline Gregora, April Bjorklund, Brian Dave, Mudra G. Schultz, Annette S. H. Chudyk, Anna M. |
author_facet | Oravec, Nebojša Monnin, Caroline Gregora, April Bjorklund, Brian Dave, Mudra G. Schultz, Annette S. H. Chudyk, Anna M. |
author_sort | Oravec, Nebojša |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Scoping reviews of health research are increasing in popularity. However, only a minority of scoping reviews in this sector engage patients and caregivers as co-producers of the research. Despite developments in scoping review methodology, which insist that stakeholder consultation is essential, no guiding methods exist to instruct the conduct of this stage. Thus, it is necessary to understand how patients and caregivers have been engaged as part of scoping reviews, toward a unifying methodology. METHODS: We have developed a protocol for a scoping review of methods used to engage patients and caregivers in scoping reviews of health research. The search strategy will comprise two phases: the first will involve a secondary analysis of retrieved articles from a prior scoping review, and the second will identify articles that cite Levac et al.’s update to the original scoping review framework by Arksey and O’Malley. Titles and full texts of retrieved articles will be screened in duplicate. Inclusion will be limited to articles related to heath research that follow the six-stage scoping review framework by Arksey and O’Malley and that report patient engagement activities during at least one stage. The method of analysis of charted variables will be decided once data have been collected. Two patients will be engaged as collaborators throughout this review. We will also consult with patients, caregivers, and researchers upon completion of preliminary analyses. DISCUSSION: We anticipate that our scoping review will provide guidance for researchers seeking to involve health care stakeholders as co-producers of scoping reviews. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40900-022-00361-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9210720 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92107202022-06-22 Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews Oravec, Nebojša Monnin, Caroline Gregora, April Bjorklund, Brian Dave, Mudra G. Schultz, Annette S. H. Chudyk, Anna M. Res Involv Engagem Protocol BACKGROUND: Scoping reviews of health research are increasing in popularity. However, only a minority of scoping reviews in this sector engage patients and caregivers as co-producers of the research. Despite developments in scoping review methodology, which insist that stakeholder consultation is essential, no guiding methods exist to instruct the conduct of this stage. Thus, it is necessary to understand how patients and caregivers have been engaged as part of scoping reviews, toward a unifying methodology. METHODS: We have developed a protocol for a scoping review of methods used to engage patients and caregivers in scoping reviews of health research. The search strategy will comprise two phases: the first will involve a secondary analysis of retrieved articles from a prior scoping review, and the second will identify articles that cite Levac et al.’s update to the original scoping review framework by Arksey and O’Malley. Titles and full texts of retrieved articles will be screened in duplicate. Inclusion will be limited to articles related to heath research that follow the six-stage scoping review framework by Arksey and O’Malley and that report patient engagement activities during at least one stage. The method of analysis of charted variables will be decided once data have been collected. Two patients will be engaged as collaborators throughout this review. We will also consult with patients, caregivers, and researchers upon completion of preliminary analyses. DISCUSSION: We anticipate that our scoping review will provide guidance for researchers seeking to involve health care stakeholders as co-producers of scoping reviews. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40900-022-00361-x. BioMed Central 2022-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9210720/ /pubmed/35725640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40900-022-00361-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 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 | Protocol Oravec, Nebojša Monnin, Caroline Gregora, April Bjorklund, Brian Dave, Mudra G. Schultz, Annette S. H. Chudyk, Anna M. Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
title | Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
title_full | Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
title_fullStr | Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
title_full_unstemmed | Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
title_short | Protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
title_sort | protocol for a scoping review to map patient engagement in scoping reviews |
topic | Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9210720/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35725640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40900-022-00361-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oravecnebojsa protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews AT monnincaroline protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews AT gregoraapril protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews AT bjorklundbrian protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews AT davemudrag protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews AT schultzannettesh protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews AT chudykannam protocolforascopingreviewtomappatientengagementinscopingreviews |