Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Patient-oriented research is research conducted in partnership with patients. Patient partners contribute expertise from lived experience of interacting with the health care system, health care providers and day-to-day challenges associated with their health care concerns to these research teams. Engaging all relevant stakeholders in patient-oriented research helps focus research studies on patient-identified priorities, with the intention of generating knowledge that ensures better and more meaningful patient outcomes. A growing literature describes best practices for patient-oriented research generally, and patient involvement in systematic reviews specifically. Existing reviews of this literature have largely employed the researchers’ lens. In this review, we seek to understand meaningful engagement in synthesis reviews from the patient partner perspective.
Objectives: This patient-oriented rapid review investigated patient partners’ perspectives of meaningful engagement in synthesis review to (1) understand how research teams can conduct their reviews to ensure planned, supported and valued involvement of patient partners, and (2) describe the characteristics of a review team which enable meaningful engagement by patient partners. Our definition of meaningful engagement is based on Hamilton et al 2018.*
Methods: The review team comprised patient partners, research librarians with synthesis review experience, Saskatchewan Centre for Patient-oriented Research staff with POR experience, and academic faculty. We searched health-related databases (OVID Medline, OVID Embase, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health) and undertook a focused search of core patient-oriented research websites. Documents describing patient partners reflections on their involvement in synthesis reviews (e.g., synthesis reviews, realist reviews) were included. Screening and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Disagreements were resolved through consensus or adjudication. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis will be employed to synthesize the quantitative and qualitative data respectively.
Results: The literature search found 1090 citations of which 15 documents from 14 studies were included. Analysis of extracted data is ongoing; however, it will be completed by May 2020.
Conclusions: Based on patient partner perceptions, findings from this review contribute to a greater understanding of best practices in engaging patient partners meaningfully in a synthesis review.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: The research team included two patient partners (AE, TP) who collaborated on all aspects of the review.
*Hamilton, C. B., Hoens, A. M., Backman, C. L., McKinnon, A. M., McQuitty, S., English, K., & Li, L. C. (2018). An empirically based conceptual framework for fostering meaningful patient engagement in research. Health Expectations, 21(1), 396-406.
Objectives: This patient-oriented rapid review investigated patient partners’ perspectives of meaningful engagement in synthesis review to (1) understand how research teams can conduct their reviews to ensure planned, supported and valued involvement of patient partners, and (2) describe the characteristics of a review team which enable meaningful engagement by patient partners. Our definition of meaningful engagement is based on Hamilton et al 2018.*
Methods: The review team comprised patient partners, research librarians with synthesis review experience, Saskatchewan Centre for Patient-oriented Research staff with POR experience, and academic faculty. We searched health-related databases (OVID Medline, OVID Embase, and ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health) and undertook a focused search of core patient-oriented research websites. Documents describing patient partners reflections on their involvement in synthesis reviews (e.g., synthesis reviews, realist reviews) were included. Screening and data extraction were conducted by two independent reviewers. Disagreements were resolved through consensus or adjudication. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis will be employed to synthesize the quantitative and qualitative data respectively.
Results: The literature search found 1090 citations of which 15 documents from 14 studies were included. Analysis of extracted data is ongoing; however, it will be completed by May 2020.
Conclusions: Based on patient partner perceptions, findings from this review contribute to a greater understanding of best practices in engaging patient partners meaningfully in a synthesis review.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: The research team included two patient partners (AE, TP) who collaborated on all aspects of the review.
*Hamilton, C. B., Hoens, A. M., Backman, C. L., McKinnon, A. M., McQuitty, S., English, K., & Li, L. C. (2018). An empirically based conceptual framework for fostering meaningful patient engagement in research. Health Expectations, 21(1), 396-406.