Aim: Develop an accessible exercise to engage underserved populations about research funding priorities; analyze the criteria they use to prioritize research; contrast these criteria to those currently used by Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI).
Materials & Methods: Academic and community partners collaborated to develop an Ipad exercise to facilitate group deliberation about PCOR funding priorities. 16 groups (n = 183) of underserved individuals in both urban and rural areas participated. Recordings were qualitatively analyzed for prioritization criteria.
Results: Analysis yielded ten codes, many of which were similar to PCORI criteria, but all of which challenged or illuminated these criteria.
Conclusion: Directly involving underserved populations in determining funding criteria is both feasible and important, and can better fulfill PCORI's goal of incorporating patient priorities.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/cer-2017-0008 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!