PPI, paradoxes and Plato: who's sailing the ship?
PPI, paradoxes and Plato: who's sailing the ship?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/medethics-2011-100150
复制
发表时间：
2013-03-01
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Redwod, Sabi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ives, Jonathan;Damery, Sarah;Redwod, Sabi
在过去的十年中，患者和公众参与（PPI）已成为应用卫生研究的必要条件。一些资助机构要求PPI的明确证据，而其他人则承诺在他们资助的项目中开发PPI。尽管很常见，但仍然缺乏对PPI流程和实践的伦理和理论基础的参与。更具体地说，虽然有少量（但越来越多的）文献审查生产者价格指数的有效性和影响，但对生产者价格指数的概念/做法是否具有内在一致性的思考相对较少。在这里，作者解开了PPI中的一个“悖论”，它突出了其道德和务实的动机及其实施之间的紧张关系。作者认为，这种“专业化悖论”意味着我们需要重新思考PPI在研究中的实践和目的。
Over the last decade, patient and public involvement (PPI) has become a requisite in applied health research. Some funding bodies demand explicit evidence of PPI, while others have made a commitment to developing PPI in the projects they fund. Despite being commonplace, there remains a dearth of engagement with the ethical and theoretical underpinnings of PPI processes and practices. More specifically, while there is a small (but growing) body of literature examining the effectiveness and impact of PPI, there has been relatively little reflection on whether the concept/practice of PPI is internally coherent. Here, the authors unpick a 'paradox' within PPI, which highlights a tension between its moral and pragmatic motivations and its implementation. The authors argue that this 'professionalisation paradox' means we need to rethink the practice, and purpose, of PPI in research.