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: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

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

Participatory Design, Project Clients, and Healthcare User Groups. | LitMetric

Participatory Design, Project Clients, and Healthcare User Groups.

HERD

346230Faculty of Creative Industries, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland, Australia.

Published: April 2021

Aim: This study is the third in a series of investigations that explored the role of project user groups and how they impact on the design of a healthcare facility. Previous studies focused on a wide range of users, whereas this study sought the views of project clients.

Background: The "project client" represents the organization responsible for the procurement of a healthcare facility. "Users" will work in or "use" that building. With the input of project clients, this research focused on the user group process required for Australian and New Zealand publicly funded healthcare projects. It sought lessons to improve the process for future projects.

Methods: Previous research findings, and an expanded literature review examining participatory design, were used to develop questions for semistructured interviews with selected project clients. Responses were transcribed and analyzed in terms of themes and subthemes using reflexive thematic analysis to develop a narrative that reports and discusses the findings.

Results: Although not all are recognized, many stakeholders influence design decisions. No history, rationale, terms of reference, or evaluations of the user group process were found, suggesting that although it is a "given," the process could be enhanced. Useful suggestions for improving the user group process are offered.

Conclusions: Evaluating the user group process, and learning from alternative approaches, may improve its outcomes. A project charter and terms of reference would support more effective decision making, while best practice guidelines and education for user group participants should be considered.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1937586720948462DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

user group
20
group process
16
project clients
12
participatory design
8
user groups
8
healthcare facility
8
terms reference
8
user
7
project
6
process
6

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!