User involvement in digital health: Working together to design smart home health technology.
User involvement in digital health: Working together to design smart home health technology.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/hex.12831
复制
发表时间：
2019-03
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gooberman-Hill R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Burrows A;Meller B;Craddock I;Hyland F;Gooberman-Hill R
公众参与增加了健康研究的许多方面的价值，但很少有研究试图评估其对研究的影响。需要有这种影响的证据，以便提出最佳做法建议，并确保提供充足的资源。评估公众参与一个大型跨学科科学，技术，工程和数学（STEM）研究项目，重点是数字健康。评估是与项目的公共咨询小组成员和参与活动的研究人员一起进行的。根据公众参与价值体系和集群框架设计了两份调查问卷。PAG成员（n = 10）的反应大多是积极的规范价值观，其中包括参与研究的道德，伦理和政治方面，并对价值观有关的行为，公众参与和最佳做法。研究人员的答复（n = 16）表明，他们认为参与一般是有效的，提高了他们的工作的质量，相关性和普遍性。然而，他们对参与研究的有效性的反应是不同的。他们还强调了一些挑战，包括公众参与如何影响研究，研究中做出的决定如何与公众参与产生的观点不同，以及研究人员参与的障碍。我们的评估表明，公众和研究人员重视参与。然而，有必要考虑如何在STEM背景下更大程度地嵌入公众参与，并需要解决研究人员自身参与的任何障碍。
Public involvement adds value to numerous aspects of health research, yet few studies have attempted to evaluate its impact on research. Evidence of such impact is needed to develop recommendations for best practice and ensure adequate resourcing. To evaluate public involvement within a large interdisciplinary Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) research project that focused on digital health. The evaluation was conducted with members of the project's Public Advisory Groups (PAG) and with researchers who had participated in involvement activities. Two questionnaires were designed based on a public involvement value systems and clusters framework. Responses from members of the PAG (n = 10) were mostly positive towards normative values, which include moral, ethical and political aspects of involvement in research, and towards values concerning the conduct of public involvement and best practices. Researchers’ responses (n = 16) indicated they felt that involvement was generally effective and increased the quality, relevance and generalizability of their work. However, their responses about the validity of involvement in research were varied. They also highlighted several challenges including how well public involvement impacted on research, how decisions made in the research might differ from the views generated from public involvement, and barriers to researchers’ participation. Our evaluation suggests that members of the public and the researchers value involvement. However, there is a need to consider how to embed public involvement to an even greater extent in STEM contexts and a need to address any barriers for researchers’ own involvement.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1111/hex.12043
发表时间：
2013-12
期刊：
Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy
影响因子：
--
作者：
Gooberman-Hill R;Jinks C;Bouças SB;Hislop K;Dziedzic KS;Rhodes C;Burston A;Adams J
通讯作者：
Adams J
DOI：
10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01020.x
发表时间：
2011-11-01
影响因子：
9.9
作者：
Staniszewska, Sophie;Adebajo, Ade;Williamson, Tracey
通讯作者：
Williamson, Tracey
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Marsden, J;Bradburn, J
通讯作者：
Bradburn, J
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Snape, D.;Kirkham, J.;Jacoby, Ann
通讯作者：
Jacoby, Ann
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Boote, J;Barber, R;Cooper, C
通讯作者：
Cooper, C