Exploring the outcomes of research engagement using the observation method in an online setting

Author:

Marshall Deborah AORCID,Suryaprakash NityaORCID,Lavallee Danielle CORCID,Barker Karis LORCID,Mackean Gail,Zelinsky SandraORCID,McCarron Tamara LORCID,Santana Maria JORCID,Moayyedi PaulORCID,Bryan StirlingORCID

Abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to explore the outcomes of research engagement (patient engagement, PE) in the context of qualitative research.DesignWe observed engagement in two groups comprised of patients, clinicians and researchers tasked with conducting a qualitative preference exploration project in inflammatory bowel disease. One group was led by a patient research partner (PLG, partner led group) and the other by an academic researcher (RLG, researcher led group). A semistructured guide and a set of critical outcomes of research engagement were used as a framework to ground our analysis.SettingThe study was conducted online.ParticipantsPatient research partners (n=5), researchers (n=5) and clinicians (n=4) participated in this study.Main outcome measuresTranscripts of meetings, descriptive and reflective observation data of engagement during meetings and email correspondence between group members were analysed to identify the outcomes of PE.ResultsBoth projects were patient-centred, collaborative, meaningful, rigorous, adaptable, ethical, legitimate, understandable, feasible, timely and sustainable. Patient research partners (PRPs) in both groups wore dual hats as patients and researchers and influenced project decisions wearing both hats. They took on advisory and operational roles. Collaboration seemed easier in the PLG than in the RLG. The RLG PRPs spent more time than their counterparts in the PLG sharing their experience with biologics and helping their group identify a meaningful project question. A formal literature review informed the design, project materials and analysis in the RLG, while the formal review informed the project materials and analysis in the PLG. A PRP in the RLG and the PLG lead leveraged personal connections to facilitate recruitment. The outcomes of both projects were meaningful to all members of the groups.ConclusionsOur findings show that engagement of PRPs in research has a positive influence on the project design and delivery in the context of qualitative research in both the patient-led and researcher-led group.

Funder

Research Manitoba

Queen's University

Alberta Innovates

Montreal Heart Institute Research Centre

Crohn's and Colitis Canada

McMaster University

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

University of Alberta

Allergan

Takeda Pharmaceutical Company

Dalhousie University

University of Calgary

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3