5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Utilizing patient advocates in Parkinson’s disease: A proposed framework for patient engagement and the modern metrics that can determine its success

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The wide application of patient engagement and its associated benefits has increased across government, academic and pharmaceutical research. However, neither an identified standard practice for the process of engagement, nor utilization of common metrics to assess associated outcomes, exists. Parkinson's Foundation developed a patient engagement framework and metrics to assess engagement within the academic research and drug development sectors. This approach was developed over the course of several years through assessing the literature, acquiring feedback from researchers and people with Parkinson's disease and adapting practices to be relevant and generalizable across patient engagement projects. This framework includes the: 1) creation of a scope of work, 2) establishment of guiding principles, 3) selection and training of participants, 4) co‐determination of project metrics, 5) execution of the project and 6) dissemination of project findings. Parkinson's Foundation has also worked with academic, government and pharmaceutical stakeholders to identify metrics that assess both the quality of patient engagement and outcomes associated with patient engagement on projects. By improving patient engagement project methodologies and metrics, global clinical trials can have access to evidence‐based patient engagement practices to more efficiently capture the needs of, and potentially benefit, the patient community.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evaluating patient and stakeholder engagement in research: moving from theory to practice.

          Despite the growing demand for research that engages stakeholders, there is limited evidence in the literature to demonstrate its value - or return on investment. This gap indicates a general lack of evaluation of engagement activities. To adequately inform engagement activities, we need to further investigate the dividends of engaged research, and how to evaluate these effects. This paper synthesizes the literature on hypothesized impacts of engagement, shares what has been evaluated and identifies steps needed to reduce the gap between engagement's promises and the underlying evidence supporting its practice. This assessment provides explicit guidance for better alignment of engagement's promised benefits with evaluation efforts and identifies specific areas for development of evaluative measures and better reporting processes.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Patient Engagement In Research: Early Findings From The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              An empirically based conceptual framework for fostering meaningful patient engagement in research

              Abstract Background Patient engagement in research (PEIR) is promoted to improve the relevance and quality of health research, but has little conceptualization derived from empirical data. Objective To address this issue, we sought to develop an empirically based conceptual framework for meaningful PEIR founded on a patient perspective. Methods We conducted a qualitative secondary analysis of in‐depth interviews with 18 patient research partners from a research centre‐affiliated patient advisory board. Data analysis involved three phases: identifying the themes, developing a framework and confirming the framework. We coded and organized the data, and abstracted, illustrated, described and explored the emergent themes using thematic analysis. Directed content analysis was conducted to derive concepts from 18 publications related to PEIR to supplement, confirm or refute, and extend the emergent conceptual framework. The framework was reviewed by four patient research partners on our research team. Results Participants’ experiences of working with researchers were generally positive. Eight themes emerged: procedural requirements, convenience, contributions, support, team interaction, research environment, feel valued and benefits. These themes were interconnected and formed a conceptual framework to explain the phenomenon of meaningful PEIR from a patient perspective. This framework, the PEIR Framework, was endorsed by the patient research partners on our team. Conclusions The PEIR Framework provides guidance on aspects of PEIR to address for meaningful PEIR. It could be particularly useful when patient‐researcher partnerships are led by researchers with little experience of engaging patients in research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                mfeeney@parkinson.org
                Journal
                Health Expect
                Health Expect
                10.1111/(ISSN)1369-7625
                HEX
                Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1369-6513
                1369-7625
                03 May 2020
                August 2020
                : 23
                : 4 ( doiID: 10.1111/hex.v23.4 )
                : 722-730
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Parkinson’s Foundation New York New York
                [ 2 ] Section of Movement Disorders Department of Neurological Sciences Rush University Medical Center Chicago Illinois
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Megan Feeney, Parkinson’s Foundation, New York, NY.

                Email: mfeeney@ 123456parkinson.org

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4687-8364
                Article
                HEX13064
                10.1111/hex.13064
                7495075
                32363785
                5f7e8f07-44cb-4d2d-9838-aab5f6f8a6bc
                © 2020 The Authors. Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 11 November 2019
                : 31 March 2020
                : 04 April 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 9, Words: 6118
                Categories
                Viewpoint Article
                Viewpoint Article
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                August 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.9.1 mode:remove_FC converted:17.09.2020

                Health & Social care
                methodology,metrics,patient advocacy,patient empowerment,patient engagement,patient involvement

                Comments

                Comment on this article