Models and impact of patient and public involvement in studies carried out by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London: findings from ten case studiesReportar como inadecuado




Models and impact of patient and public involvement in studies carried out by the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit at University College London: findings from ten case studies - Descarga este documento en PDF. Documentación en PDF para descargar gratis. Disponible también para leer online.

Trials

, 17:376

First Online: 29 July 2016Received: 11 February 2016Accepted: 15 June 2016DOI: 10.1186-s13063-016-1488-9

Cite this article as: South, A., Hanley, B., Gafos, M. et al. Trials 2016 17: 376. doi:10.1186-s13063-016-1488-9

Abstract

BackgroundPatient and public involvement PPI in studies carried out by the UK Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit MRC CTU at University College London varies by research type and setting. We developed a series of case studies of PPI to document and share good practice.

MethodsWe used purposive sampling to identify studies representing the scope of research at the MRC CTU and different approaches to PPI. We carried out semi-structured interviews with staff and patient representatives. Interview notes were analysed descriptively to categorise the main aims and motivations for involvement; activities undertaken; their impact on the studies and lessons learned.

ResultsWe conducted 19 interviews about ten case studies, comprising one systematic review, one observational study and 8 randomised controlled trials in HIV and cancer. Studies were either open or completed, with start dates between 2003 and 2011. Interviews took place between March and November 2014 and were updated in summer 2015 where there had been significant developments in the study i.e. if the study had presented results subsequent to the interview taking place. A wide range of PPI models, including representation on trial committees or management groups, community engagement, one-off task-focused activities, patient research partners and participant involvement had been used. Overall, interviewees felt that PPI had a positive impact, leading to improvements, for example in the research question; study design; communication with potential participants; study recruitment; confidence to carry out or complete a study; interpretation and communication of results; and influence on future research.

ConclusionsA range of models of PPI can benefit clinical studies. Researchers should consider different approaches to PPI, based on the desired impact and the people they want to involve. Use of multiple models may increase the potential impacts of PPI in clinical research.

KeywordsPatient and public involvement Consumer involvement Clinical trials Systematic reviews RCTs Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article doi:10.1186-s13063-016-1488-9 contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

An erratum to this article can be found at http:-dx.doi.org-10.1186-s13063-016-1567-y.

Download fulltext PDF



Autor: Annabelle South - Bec Hanley - Mitzy Gafos - Ben Cromarty - Richard Stephens - Kate Sturgeon - Karen Scott - William J. C

Fuente: https://link.springer.com/







Documentos relacionados