Cargando…

Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is twofold: first, to describe the methods used when involving children and young people (CYP) in developing a paediatric research agenda and, second, to evaluate how the existing literature describes the impact of involving CYP. We distinguish three forms of i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Postma, Laura, Luchtenberg, Malou L, Verhagen, A A Eduard, Maeckelberghe, Els L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9703322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36645790
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001610
_version_ 1784839818025369600
author Postma, Laura
Luchtenberg, Malou L
Verhagen, A A Eduard
Maeckelberghe, Els L
author_facet Postma, Laura
Luchtenberg, Malou L
Verhagen, A A Eduard
Maeckelberghe, Els L
author_sort Postma, Laura
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is twofold: first, to describe the methods used when involving children and young people (CYP) in developing a paediatric research agenda and, second, to evaluate how the existing literature describes the impact of involving CYP. We distinguish three forms of impact: impact on the research agenda (focused impact), impact on researchers and CYP (diffuse impact) and impact on future research (research impact). DESIGN: A narrative review of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar was conducted from October 2016 to January 2022. The included studies involved at least one CYP in developing a research agenda and were published in English. RESULTS: 22 studies were included; the CYP involved were aged between 6 years and 25 years. Little variation was found in the methods used to involve them. The methods used were James Lind Alliance (JLA) approach (n=16), focus groups (n=2), workshop (n=2), research prioritisation by affected communities (n=1) and combined methods (n=1). Impact was rarely described: focused impact in nine studies, diffuse impact in zero studies and research impact in three studies. CONCLUSION: This study concludes that the JLA approach is most frequently used to involve CYP and that all methods used to involve them are rarely evaluated. It also concludes that the reported impact of involving CYPs is incomplete. This study implies that to convince sceptical researchers of the benefits of involving CYPs and to justify the costs, more attention should be paid to reporting these impacts.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9703322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97033222022-11-29 Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review Postma, Laura Luchtenberg, Malou L Verhagen, A A Eduard Maeckelberghe, Els L BMJ Paediatr Open Review OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is twofold: first, to describe the methods used when involving children and young people (CYP) in developing a paediatric research agenda and, second, to evaluate how the existing literature describes the impact of involving CYP. We distinguish three forms of impact: impact on the research agenda (focused impact), impact on researchers and CYP (diffuse impact) and impact on future research (research impact). DESIGN: A narrative review of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Google Scholar was conducted from October 2016 to January 2022. The included studies involved at least one CYP in developing a research agenda and were published in English. RESULTS: 22 studies were included; the CYP involved were aged between 6 years and 25 years. Little variation was found in the methods used to involve them. The methods used were James Lind Alliance (JLA) approach (n=16), focus groups (n=2), workshop (n=2), research prioritisation by affected communities (n=1) and combined methods (n=1). Impact was rarely described: focused impact in nine studies, diffuse impact in zero studies and research impact in three studies. CONCLUSION: This study concludes that the JLA approach is most frequently used to involve CYP and that all methods used to involve them are rarely evaluated. It also concludes that the reported impact of involving CYPs is incomplete. This study implies that to convince sceptical researchers of the benefits of involving CYPs and to justify the costs, more attention should be paid to reporting these impacts. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9703322/ /pubmed/36645790 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001610 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review
Postma, Laura
Luchtenberg, Malou L
Verhagen, A A Eduard
Maeckelberghe, Els L
Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
title Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
title_full Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
title_fullStr Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
title_full_unstemmed Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
title_short Involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
title_sort involving children and young people in paediatric research priority setting: a narrative review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9703322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36645790
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001610
work_keys_str_mv AT postmalaura involvingchildrenandyoungpeopleinpaediatricresearchprioritysettinganarrativereview
AT luchtenbergmaloul involvingchildrenandyoungpeopleinpaediatricresearchprioritysettinganarrativereview
AT verhagenaaeduard involvingchildrenandyoungpeopleinpaediatricresearchprioritysettinganarrativereview
AT maeckelbergheelsl involvingchildrenandyoungpeopleinpaediatricresearchprioritysettinganarrativereview