A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Patients' and clinicians' research priorities. | LitMetric

Patients' and clinicians' research priorities.

Health Expect

ESRC Research Fellow, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, London, UK.

Published: December 2011

Background: If research addresses the questions of relevance to patients and clinicians, decision-makers will be better equipped to design and deliver health services which meet their needs. To this end, a number of initiatives have engaged patients and clinicians in setting research agendas. This paper aimed to scope the research literature addressing such efforts.

Methods: A systematic search strategy combined electronic searches of bibliographic databases with handsearching and contacting key authors. Two researchers, initially working independently, described the relevant reports.

Findings: Over 250 studies addressed patients' or clinicians' priorities for research and outcomes for assessment. This literature described different routes for patients and clinicians to contribute to research agendas. Two-thirds of the studies addressing patients' or clinicians' research questions were applicable across health care, with the remainder focussed on specific health conditions. The 27 formal studies of patient involvement revealed a literature that has grown in the last decade. Although only nine studies engaged patients and clinicians in identifying research questions together, they show that methods have advanced over time, with all of them engaging participants directly and repeatedly in facilitated debate and most employing formal decision-making procedures.

Conclusion: A sizeable literature is available to inform priorities for research and the methods for setting research agendas with patients and clinicians. We recommend that research funders and researchers draw on this literature to provide relevant research for health service decision-makers.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5060597PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00648.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

patients clinicians
20
patients' clinicians'
12
clinicians' priorities
8
engaged patients
8
setting agendas
8
patients
5
clinicians
5
literature
5
priorities background
4
background addresses
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!