Power to the people: To what extent has public involvement in applied health research achieved this?
Power to the people: To what extent has public involvement in applied health research achieved this?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s40900-016-0042-y
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Green G
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Green G
在联合王国资助的应用卫生研究需要公众参与。最大的资助者之一，国家卫生研究所（NIHR）明确表示，它重视患者和公众的知识。因此，现在有许多资源可以确保在有关研究的决策中纳入公众的声音。然而，人们担心公众的声音对研究决策的影响仍然有限。这篇文章问的是，权力在多大程度上从科研界转移到了公众手中？它着眼于多少权力和影响力的患者和公众成员对研究的问题：公众如何有助于决定哪些研究领域和哪些研究项目应该得到资助？它们如何影响研究的进行？文章认为，有证据表明，公众的声音是目前在研究决策。然而，很少有证据表明科学研究界和公众之间的权力动态发生了变化。参与研究的公众并不总是平等的伙伴。科学研究界仍然拥有最大的声音，病人和公众并不总是感到有足够的权力来挑战它，公众参与应用卫生研究是许多资助机构资助的先决条件。特别是英国的国家卫生研究所（NIHR）明确表示，它重视非专业知识，并期望公众成员作为研究伙伴参与研究。因此，一个大型的公共参与基础设施已经出现，以促进这一点。然而，令人担忧的是，尽管在促进公众参与方面开展了一系列活动，但外行知识被边缘化，对研究决策的影响有限。这篇文章问的是，权力在多大程度上从科研界转移到了公众手中？它讨论了权力的含义和公众参与的模式，并审查了公众参与应用卫生研究的发展。它确定公众参与一系列决策：确定委托研究的优先领域;决定资助哪些项目;决定研究设计的细节。虽然有证据表明，公众的声音是目前在提交给NIHR的研究提案的组成，并在决策哪些项目的资金和如何进行，有较少的证据表明，在权力动态的变化体现在社会关系之间的科学研究界和公众。因此，生物医学模式仍然占主导地位，在研究决策中基本上没有受到挑战。
Public involvement is required for applied health research funded in the UK. One of the largest funders, the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), makes it clear that it values the knowledge of patients and the public. As a result, there are now many resources to make sure that the public voice is included in decision-making about research. However, there is concern that the public voice still has limited impact on research decision-making. This article asks to what extent has power shifted from the scientific research community to the public? It looks at how much power and impact patients and members of the public have about research by asking: How do the public contribute to deciding which research areas and which research projects should be funded? How do they influence how the research is carried out? The article argues that there is evidence that the public voice is present in research decision-making. However, there is less evidence of a change in the power dynamic between the scientific research community and the public. The public involved in research are not always equal partners. The scientific research community still has the loudest voice and patients and the public do not always feel sufficiently empowered to challenge it. Public involvement in applied health research is a pre-requisite for funding from many funding bodies. In particular the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) in the UK, clearly states that it values lay knowledge and there is an expectation that members of the public will participate as research partners in research. As a result a large public involvement infrastructure has emerged to facilitate this. However, there is concern that despite the flurry of activity in promoting public involvement, lay knowledge is marginalised and has limited impact on research decision-making. This article asks to what extent has power shifted from the scientific research community to the public? It discusses the meaning of power and models of public involvement and examines the development of public involvement in applied health research. It identifies public involvement in a range of decision-making: identifying priority areas for commissioning research; making decisions about which projects are funded; decisions about details of research design. Whilst there is evidence that the public voice is present in the composition of research proposals submitted to NIHR and in the decision-making about which projects are funded and how they are carried out, there is less evidence of a change in the power dynamic manifest in social relations between the scientific research community and the public. As a result the biomedical model remains dominant and largely unchallenged in research decision-making.