Lignes directrices d'évaluation critique pour apprécier la qualité et l'impact de la participation des usagers à la recherche

Titre original en anglais : Critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in research

Sources de métadonnées utilisées pour cette référence

OpenAlex Crossref OpenCitations
En savoir plus sur les sources utilisées

Wright, D., Foster, C., Amir, Z., Elliott, J., & Wilson, R. (2010). Critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in research. Health Expectations, 13(4), 359-368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00607.x

Date de publication: 09/07/2010 Ajout dans AutiHub: 18/07/2026 Type: Article Langue de l’article: Anglais
Source OpenAlex Source éditeur (DOI)

Cette publication est intégrée dans AutiHub via :

Auteurs

Auteur·ices des publications
5
Auteur·ices de la publication identifié·es comme autistes
0 / 5 (0,0 %)
  1. David Wright
  2. Claire Foster
  3. Ziv Amir
  4. Jim Elliott
  5. Roger Wilson

Résumé

Résumé Contexte La participation des usagers des services à la conception et à la conduite de la recherche en santé s'est considérablement développée au Royaume-Uni ces dernières années. La participation des usagers est désormais considérée comme une composante essentielle des bonnes pratiques de recherche pour toutes les formes de recherche en santé. Compte tenu du rôle important que les usagers jouent dans la recherche en santé, il est nécessaire d'élaborer des lignes directrices pour leur participation effective. Bien que des lignes directrices soient actuellement en cours de formulation, il n'existe toujours aucun critère permettant d'évaluer la participation des usagers dans les études publiées et les demandes de financement. Objectif Cette étude propose des lignes directrices pour évaluer la qualité et l'impact de la participation des usagers dans les articles publiés et les demandes de subvention. Méthodes Des lignes directrices d'évaluation de la participation des usagers ont été élaborées sur la base de la littérature disponible et des expériences tirées d'études impliquant des patients atteints de cancer et des aidants dans la conception et la conduite de la recherche. Résultats Neuf critères d'évaluation ont été élaborés. Les critères comprennent des questions telles que « La justification de l'implication des usagers est-elle clairement démontrée ? », « Le niveau de participation des usagers est-il approprié ? », « La stratégie de recrutement est-elle appropriée ? » et « La nature de la formation est-elle appropriée ? » Conclusion L'élaboration et l'application de lignes directrices sont essentielles pour que l'impact du programme de participation des usagers dans la recherche en santé puisse être compris.

Abstract Background The involvement of service users in the design and conduct of health research has developed significantly in the UK in recent years. Involving service users is now seen as a core component of good research practice for all forms of health research. Given the important role that users have in health research, it is necessary to develop guidelines for their effective involvement. Whilst guidelines are currently being formulated, there remain no criteria with which to assess user involvement in published studies and funding applications. Objective This study offers guidelines for appraising the quality and impact of user involvement in published papers and grant applications. Methods Appraisal guidelines for user involvement have been developed on the basis of available literature and experiences from studies involving cancer patients and carers in the design and conduct of research. Findings Nine appraisal criteria have been developed. Criteria include issues such as ‘Is the rationale for involving users clearly demonstrated?’, ‘Is the level of user involvement appropriate?’, ‘Is the recruitment strategy appropriate?’, and ‘Is the nature of training appropriate?’ Conclusion Generating and applying guidelines is vital if the impact of user involvement agenda in health research is to be understood.

Bibliographie citée par cette référence

Les références citées sont importées depuis des sources externes de métadonnées lorsqu’elles sont disponibles. La liste peut être partielle.

  1. Bec Hanley , Ann Truesdale , Andy King , Diana Elbourne , Iain Chalmers (2001). Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey . BMJ, 322(7285), 519-523. BMJ.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1136/bmj.322.7285.519 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W1975573440
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  2. Hanley J (2003). Involving the Public in NHS, Public Health, and Social Care Research: Briefing Notes for Researchers . Involving the Public in NHS, Public Health, and Social Care Research: Briefing Notes for Researchers.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  3. J Corner , David Wright , J Hopkinson , Y Gunaratnam , J W McDonald , Claire Foster (2007). The research priorities of patients attending UK cancer treatment centres: findings from a modified nominal group study . British Journal of Cancer, 96(6), 875-881. Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603662 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W1995218742
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  4. David Wright , Jessica Corner , Jane Hopkinson , Claire Foster (2006). Listening to the views of people affected by cancer about cancer research: an example of participatory research in setting the cancer research agenda . Health Expectations, 9(1), 3-12. Wiley.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2006.00353.x OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W1995122166
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  5. Margot Parkes , Ruth Panelli (2001). Integrating Catchment Ecosystems and Community Health: The Value of Participatory Action Research . Ecosystem Health, 7(2), 85-106. Wiley.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1046/j.1526-0992.2001.007002085.x OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2103209569
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  6. Jim Cassidy (2007). Why patient representation might harm science? Breast Cancer Research, 9(S2). Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1186/bcr1802 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2137329809
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  7. R Lowry (2004). Involving the Public in NHS, Public Health, and Social Care Research: Briefing Notes For Researchers . British Dental Journal, 197(3), 162-162. Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4811534 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2031385520
    OpenAlex
  8. Department of Health (2005). Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care . Research Governance Framework for Health and Social Care.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  9. Mike Fisher (2002). The role of service users in problem formulation and technical aspects of social research . Social Work Education, 21(3), 305-312. Informa UK Limited.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1080/02615470220136885 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2072735883
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  10. David Wright , Jane B Hopkinson , Jessica L Corner , Claire Foster (2006). How to involve cancer patients at the end of life as co-researchers . Palliative Medicine, 20(8), 821-827. SAGE Publications.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1177/0269216306073110 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2034852005
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  11. Jonathan Boote , Rosemary Barber , Cindy Cooper (2006). Principles and indicators of successful consumer involvement in NHS research: Results of a Delphi study and subgroup analysis . Health Policy, 75(3), 280-297. Elsevier BV.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.03.012 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2065915700
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  12. Tony Stevens , David Wilde , John Hunt , Sam H Ahmedzai (2003). Overcoming the challenges to consumer involvement in cancer research . Health Expectations, 6(1), 81-88. Wiley.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2003.00214.x OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2134013904
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  13. Máire O’Donnell , Vikki Entwistle (2004). Consumer involvement in decisions about what health-related research is funded . Health Policy, 70(3), 281-290. Elsevier BV.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.04.004 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2069446548
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  14. Buckland S (2001). Involving Consumers? An Exploration of Consumer Involvement in NHS Research and Development managed by Department of Health Regional Offices . Involving Consumers? An Exploration of Consumer Involvement in NHS Research and Development managed by Department of Health Regional Offices.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  15. Deborah Tallon , Jiri Chard , Paul Dieppe (2000). Relation between agendas of the research community and the research consumer . The Lancet, 355(9220), 2037-2040. Elsevier BV.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(00)02351-5 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2133505056
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  16. Reason P (2001). Handbook of Action Research: Participation, Inquiry and Practice . Handbook of Action Research: Participation, Inquiry and Practice, 1.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  17. Turner M (2005). User Controlled Research: Its Meaning and Potential . User Controlled Research: Its Meaning and Potential.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  18. Jonathan Boote , Rosemary Telford , Cindy Cooper (2002). Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda . Health Policy, 61(2), 213-236. Elsevier BV.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8510(01)00214-7 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2134959888
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  19. (s. d.). Integrated Research Application System Version 2. 5. Available at: https://www.myresearchproject.org.uk/ accessed 23 November 2009.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  20. David Wright , Jessica L Corner , Jane B Hopkinson , Claire Foster (2007). The case for user involvement in research: the research priorities of cancer patients . Breast Cancer Research, 9(S2). Springer Science and Business Media LLC.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1186/bcr1801 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2137205058
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  21. S Danielle MacNeil , Conrad V Fernandez (2006). Offering results to research participants . BMJ, 332(7535), 188-189. BMJ.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1136/bmj.332.7535.188 OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2152564027
    Crossref OpenAlex OpenCitations
  22. (s. d.). National Breast Cancer Coalition. Available at: http://www.natlbcc.org/ accessed 23 November 2009.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  23. Corner J (2006). The Macmillan Listening Study: Listening to the Views of People Affected by Cancer About Cancer Research . The Macmillan Listening Study: Listening to the Views of People Affected by Cancer About Cancer Research.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  24. Marc Taylor (2002). Research governance framework for health and social care . Health and Social Care in the Community, 10(1), 6-9. Hindawi Limited.
    Type: Article DOI: 10.1046/j.0966-0410.2001.00336.x OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2418620050
    OpenAlex
  25. Ruth Chambers (2004). Why don't health researchers report consumer involvement? Quality in primary care, 12(2), 151.
    Type: Article OpenAlex: https://openalex.org/W2603709040
    Crossref OpenAlex
  26. Amir Z (2005). Involving users in research . Health Service Journal, 13, 31.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref
  27. Mort M (1996). The user card: picking through the organisational undergrowth in health and social care . Contemporary Political Studies, 2, 1133.
    Type: Autre
    Crossref