The Dignity Project Framework: An extreme citizen science framework in occupational therapy and rehabilitation research

Ethical implications of defining longstanding anorexia nervosa

The label severe and enduring anorexia nervosa (SE-AN) is widely used in the literature on longstanding anorexia nervosa (AN). However, the process of constructing the criteria and the use of the label SE-AN has ethical implications that have not been taken into account. Through combining existing literature and lived experience perspective, this paper addresses to what extent the current criteria do and do not reflect the lived experience. Arguments are presented on why the process of constructing the criteria for SE-AN and the application of the label can be both identified as, and give rise to, epistemic injustice. Epistemic injustice is an injustice that is done to a person as an individual with the capacity of acquiring and sharing knowledge. This type of injustice can occur at any stage of an interaction between people in which knowledge is shared with one another. The paper concludes by giving suggestions on how to pursue epistemic justice in the process of defining longstanding AN.

Defining dignity at the intersection of disability: a scoping review

PURPOSE

This scoping literature review aimed to determine the definition of dignity in relation to disability. It also examined the extent to which inclusive research methods have been used to develop working definitions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in five electronic databases, using a modified framework by Arksey and O'Malley. Narrative synthesis and qualitative content analysis were employed to examine definitions of dignity and the use of inclusive research methods.

RESULTS

22 peer-reviewed studies were included. The majority of the studies were qualitative (72.72%) and examined various disability populations in diverse settings. Although 19 studies offered a definition of dignity, there was no clear consensus. Dignity was frequently defined from a utilitarian perspective, emphasising affordances and barriers. However, engagement with theoretical constructs was superficial and limited. Further, no studies mentioned the use of inclusive research methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The absence of inclusive research methods hinders the development of a comprehensive definition of dignity that is accepted by and relevant to people with disability. Engaging with both theoretical and empirical perspectives of dignity is crucial to develop a meaningful and inclusive definition, which can inform interventions and policies that enhance dignity for people with disability across diverse settings and contexts.

Dignity and the Importance of Acknowledgement of Personhood for People With Disability

Exploring the intricate relationship between individual and collective experiences, this study explores dignity from the perspectives of people with disability. Using an extreme citizen science approach, we engaged people with disability as active partners in gathering data through qualitative surveys and focus groups. Framework Analysis was employed to ensure the validity of findings while privileging the voices of people with lived experience of disability. Dignity was contingent on the acknowledgement of personhood and the delivery of human rights. Our research identified five key aspects to maintain and protect dignity: (1) acknowledging personhood; (2) recognising people with disability as decision-makers of their lives; (3) realising the right to access information; (4) maintaining the right to privacy; and (5) eliminating or minimising barriers to accessibility and inclusion. Undignified experiences that resulted from a lack of acknowledgement negatively affected participants' wellbeing, and healthcare settings were identified as particularly challenging environments for dignity. These findings have significant implications for healthcare systems and services within an international and interdisciplinary context. They emphasise the need for adaptable, flexible services, co-designed with people with lived experience of disability. Addressing organisational constraints, resource limitations, and expectations is paramount to ensuring dignity is maintained through the acknowledgement of personhood and safeguarding of human rights.

Moving from Interest to Engagement-Understanding the Research Capacity Building Needs of Rehabilitation Doctors

INTRODUCTION

Doctors working in rehabilitation settings have specialized clinical skills and experience, but research activity may be constrained by time pressures and inadequate current skills. This means missed opportunities to contribute to the evidence-base for better clinical practice and outcomes for people living with disabling, chronic complex conditions. This research aimed to understand rehabilitation doctors' research needs, experience, and aspirations to enable future training initiatives that are tailored to their practice context.

METHODS

This exploratory sequential mixed-method study comprised a survey followed by focus groups. Rehabilitation doctors from three health services in south-east Queensland, Australia completed an online survey incorporating the Research Spider to explore their research experience, confidence, interest, opportunity, and intent. Focus groups explored the survey results and participants' views regarding strategies to build research capacity.

RESULTS

The major findings were the gap between high research interest and low experience, confidence and opportunity; and fundamental research skills were identified as priority training topics. These findings support previous research. However, rehabilitation doctors may also have a self-expectation that, as competent clinicians, they should necessarily also be research-competent, and hold misperceptions regarding the shared nature of health services research.

DISCUSSION

Protected time and funding may enhance engagement with research to generate specialty-relevant evidence for practice. To this end, a research capacity building initiative in the form of a series of self-directed learning packages has been developed and implemented. A tailored workshop to strengthen rehabilitation doctors' research skills and engagement has also been developed for implementation.

'Learning and growing together': exploring consumer partnerships in a PhD, an ethnographic study

BACKGROUND

Consumer and community involvement (CCI) in health research is increasingly recognised as best practice and is closely linked with calls for epistemic justice and more transparent university collaborations with consumers. Given doctoral candidates play a key role in the future of co-production, examination of consumer partnerships in PhDs is important. This study aimed to describe and evaluate consumer partnerships in a PhD from the perspective of the consumer co-researchers, the PhD candidate, and the academic supervisors including optimal approaches, impacts, and benefits and challenges.

METHODS

This prospective, co-produced ethnographic study was conducted over 33 months. Data collection included field notes, a monthly online log of partnership experiences and time spent, interviews or a focus group every six months, and a PhD student reflexive diary. Qualitative data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The student, two academics, and four consumer co-researchers were involved. A mean of 11.10 h per month were spent on CCI. The student spent the most time (mean 15.86 h per month). Preparation for dissemination of findings was the most frequent partnership activity. The two overarching themes emphasised that a PhD promotes a rich partnership ethos with the student at the centre and that the partnership was a worthwhile but challenging process. The four sub-themes highlighted that developing a collegial and supportive environment with regular meetings combined with a multi-faceted and responsive co-learning approach were core to success. Additionally, there were benefits for individuals, research processes and outcomes, and for driving change in consumer-academic research partnerships. Recruiting to and forming the partnership, maintaining the collaboration through inevitable changes and challenges, and an ethical and supportive closure of the research team were critical.

CONCLUSIONS

This longitudinal ethnographic study demonstrated that doctoral research can create a rich ethos for research and knowledge co-production which evolved over time. Equalising power dynamics through relationship building and co-learning was critical. Additionally, a focus on supportively ending the partnership was essential, and CCI may reduce PhD student isolation and procrastination. Enhanced university incentivisation of co-production in health research is recommended to address gaps in consumer remuneration and student support.

Disability Research in Australia: Deciding to Be a Research Participant and the Experience of Participation

Little is known about why people with disability choose to take part in disability research and what their experience is like. Knowledge of this may help researchers and research ethics committees improve the empowered and ethical participation of people with disability in disability, healthcare, and human service focussed research. This cross-sectional mixed-methods study explored the perspectives and experiences of a group of Australian adults with disability regarding their involvement in research. Online surveys (N = 29) and follow-up interviews (N = 15) were conducted. The study found the decision to participate was a complex appraisal of benefit to self and others, research relevance, value, comfort, convenience, safety and risk. The attitudes and behaviours of researchers in cultivating trust by adopting an empathic approach to the conduct of disability research appear to be an important aspect of participant experience. Research ethics committees may benefit from knowledge of the 'microethical' moments that occur in such research.