Aim: Describe patient, caregiver and clinician views toward engagement as partners in health research.
Materials & Methods: Online surveys of patients and caregivers managing rare (n = 560 patients, n = 609 caregivers) or chronic conditions (n = 762 patients, n = 776 caregivers) and practicing clinicians (n = 638).
Results: Over half of respondents were unfamiliar with the concept of partnering with researchers but most expressed interest in working in a research partnership.
Aim: To assess awareness, use and attitudes concerning comparative effectiveness research (CER) findings.
Materials & Methods: Online surveys of patients and caregivers managing rare (n = 560 patients, n = 609 caregivers) or chronic conditions (n = 762 patients, n = 776 caregivers), and practicing clinicians (n = 638).
Results: Less than half of patients and caregivers reported exposure to any type of CER findings in the past 12 months.
Aim: To understand researcher capability for and interest in patient-centered comparative effectiveness research (PC-CER), particularly related to engaging with patients/caregivers.
Materials & Methods: Web-based survey of 508 health researchers recruited via professional health research organizations.
Results: Most respondents (94%) were familiar with CER and many (69%) reported having previously conducting some form of CER.
Objective: This essay discusses applying the Conceptual Framework for Patient and Family Engagement to partnerships with patients and consumers to increase their use of research evidence in healthcare decisions. The framework's foundational principles hold that engagement occurs on a continuum across all levels of healthcare-from direct care to policymaking-with patients and healthcare professionals working in full partnership and sharing responsibility for achieving a safe, high-quality, efficient, and patient-centered healthcare system.
Discussion: Research evidence can serve as a critical decision-making tool in partnerships between patients and health professionals.
Efforts to engage patients and consumers in comparative effectiveness research (CER) in the USA are still in the early stages, and the outcomes of these partnerships have yet to be fully understood or realized. Our work assisting federal agencies and national organizations who engage patients and consumers in CER reveal three unresolved tensions around the representation of the patient experience in the research process, the culture of research and capacity to partner with patients and consumers, and the conflict between the methodological approaches to CER and the outcomes of interest to patients and caregivers. Several approaches to address these tensions have emerged, yet resolving these tensions will require addressing many system-level challenges and building an evidence base for consumer engagement in CER.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF