An empirically based conceptual framework for fostering meaningful patient engagement in research

Establishment of a patient and public involvement and engagement group to support clinical trials in Pakistan: Initial lessons learned

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in clinical trials is increasingly recognized as vital for ensuring research relevance and accessibility. Despite its proven benefits, PPIE remains limited, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, and more examples of effective strategies for involvement are needed. This commentary outlines the establishment of a PPIE group for clinical trials in a lower-middle-income country setting with limited research infrastructure.

MAIN BODY

We established Pakistan's first ever PPIE group for clinical trials within a new clinical trials unit at Ziauddin University in Karachi. The objectives of our project were focused on group formation, redesign of informed consent documents for trials, and dissemination of trial results to the public. Recruitment strategies involved referrals from clinicians and existing collaborators as well as engagement at public events, distribution of advertising leaflets and social media posts. Ten potential members were selected based on motivation, commitment and ability to contribute critically, with six members continuing their involvement long-term. An existing tool designed to establish the access needs of public partners was adapted to our project to help us document and account for members' expectations and support requirements. The process of using the tool enabled deep engagement, clarified roles, and fostered trust between coordinators and group members. Patient and public members gained confidence about the legitimacy of the project and felt more comfortable participating in the first group meeting. Lessons learned emphasize the importance of wide-ranging engagement efforts and transparent discussions about expectations to build effective collaborative relationships.

CONCLUSION

Our experience demonstrates the feasibility of establishing a PPIE group for clinical trials in Pakistan and highlights strong public interest for research involvement. The use of a formal tool to document needs, prior experiences and expectations encouraged relationship-building and helped coordinators make relevant accommodations for members. This account contributes to the growing body of literature on effective PPIE practices, emphasizing the value of tailored support and transparent communication in facilitating meaningful public involvement in clinical trials.

Patient engagement as a collaborative process in a large Dutch COVID-19 vaccination study (RECOVAC) - insight into the contribution of patient engagement and learnings for the future

BACKGROUND

The need for patient engagement in health research has been increasingly acknowledged and accepted in recent years. However, implementation is still limited due to lack of evidence on its value and lack of guidance on how to implement patient engagement. This study aims to provide insight into the contribution of patient engagement in the RECOVAC project, which studied COVID-19 vaccination in kidney patients, and formulate concrete practice-based action perspectives for patient engagement.

METHODS

We used a qualitative participatory mixed methods approach, based on the Patient Engagement Monitoring and Evaluation (PEME) framework. Patient engagement and data collection were based on the Reflexive Monitoring in Action (RMA) approach. Data collection included participant observations, open ended questionnaires and interactive reflection sessions. Qualitative analysis was done via a thematic approach.

RESULTS

We have described the process of patient engagement systematically, provided insight in its value and found that there is a need for clear aims, expectations and preparations from the start of the engagement process. We have shown that reflection throughout the process is of utmost importance and the same applies to clear communication between researchers and patient representatives. By being part of the consortium patient representatives had direct access to information, straight from the source, on for example the vaccination schedule and medication availability and had indirect influence on decisions made by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) on preventive measures and treatment against COVID-19. Having experienced patient representatives is important, otherwise training needs to be provided. We also found that patient engagement had impact on conduct and outcomes of research activities itself and may have impact on future research and patient engagement activities in general.

CONCLUSION

Patient engagement has changed the course of the project. Concrete practice-based action perspectives have been formulated, which are already being implemented by the Dutch Kidney Patients Association (NVN). Studying patient engagement in a high pace project with high public interest has resulted in lessons learned and will help prepare and implement patient involvement in future research projects.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The RECOVAC studies in which the patient engagement took place are registered at clinicialtrial.gov (NCT04741386 registration date 2021-02-04, NCT04841785 registration date 2021-03-22 and NCT05030974 registration date 2021-08-20).

A protocol for stakeholder engagement in head and neck cancer pragmatic trials

Meaningful engagement with stakeholders in research demands intentional approaches. This paper describes the development of a framework to guide stakeholder engagement as research partners in a pragmatic trial proposed to evaluate behavioral interventions for dysphagia in head and neck cancer patients. We highlight the core principles of stakeholder engagement including representation of all perspectives, meaningful participation, respectful partnership with stakeholders, and accountability to stakeholders; and describe how these principles were operationalized to engage relevant stakeholders throughout the course of a large clinical trial.

Development, implementation, and scalability of the Family Engagement in Research Course: a novel online course for family partners and researchers in neurodevelopmental disability and child health

BACKGROUND

Since 2011 when the Canadian Institutes of Health Research launched the Strategy for Patient Oriented Research, there has been a growing expectation to embed patient-oriented research (POR) in the health research community in Canada. To meet this expectation and build capacity for POR in the field of neurodevelopmental disability and child health, in 2017 researchers and family leaders at CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research, McMaster University partnered with Kids Brain Health Network and McMaster Continuing Education to develop and implement a 10-week online Family Engagement in Research (FER) Course.

MAIN TEXT

From its inception, the FER Course has been delivered in partnership with family leaders and researchers. The FER Course is innovative in its co-learning and community building approach. The course is designed to bring family partners and researchers together to co-learn and connect, and to develop competency and confidence in both the theory and practice of family engagement in research. Coursework involves four live online group discussions, individual review of course materials, weekly group activities, and a final group project and presentation. Upon completion of the FER Course, graduates earn a McMaster University micro-credential.

CONCLUSIONS

To meet a need in building capacity in POR, a novel course in the field of neurodevelopmental disability and child health has been co-created and delivered. Over six years (2018-2023), the FER Course has trained more than 430 researchers and family partners across 20 countries. A unique outcome of the FER Course is that graduates expressed the wish to stay connected and continue to collaborate well beyond the course in turn creating an international FER Community Network that continues to evolve based on need. The FER Course is creating a growing international community of researchers, trainees, self-advocates, and family partners who are championing the implementation of meaningful engagement in neurodevelopmental disability and child health research and beyond. The course is internationally recognized with an established record of building capacity in POR. Its uptake, sustainability, and scalability to date has illustrated that training programs like the FER Course are necessary for building capacity and leadership in family engagement in research.

Patient engagement in research: lessons learned from CAPTURE ALS, a longitudinal observational ALS study

OBJECTIVE

There are compelling ethical and practical reasons for patient engagement in research (PEIR), however, evidence for best practices remains limited. We investigated PEIR as implemented in CAPTURE ALS, a longitudinal observational study, from study inception through the first 2.5 years of operations.

METHODS

Data were drawn from three engagement initiatives: a community-led letter-writing campaign; consultation with patient and caregiver focus groups; and a study-embedded 'participant partner advisory council' (PPAC). Data were derived retrospectively from study documentation. We used the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) participation spectrum as a framework for investigation.

RESULTS

2401 letters from community members to the Canadian government affirmed study objectives and advocated for funding. Feedback from focus group consultation influenced study design and supported the study's data-sharing plan. PPAC collaboration shaped all aspects of the study. Contributions included: co-creation of governance documents, input on study protocols and public-facing communication, and development of engagement webinars for study participants and feedback surveys. Effective communication practices fostered collaboration and helped avoid tokenistic engagement. CAPTURE ALS encompassed all IAP2 participation levels.

CONCLUSIONS

CAPTURE ALS was shaped by meaningful engagement initiatives over the course of the study. Lessons learned included: begin early and embed PEIR within research; build relationships and foster mutual learning; be flexible, open to adaptation, and seek diversity. Primary challenges included funding for early implementation, time needed to maintain relationships, and attrition due to disease progression. All IAP2 participation levels contributed to meaningful PEIR. 'Empowerment' was demonstrated through advocacy.

Patient research partner engagement in OMERACT: Enhancing engagement through the implementation of patient engagement in research tools

OBJECTIVES

This paper describes the evolution and impact of Patient Research Partners (PRPs) in shaping research within OMERACT and provides a framework to enhance their engagement. This session explored one component of a validated framework to evaluate meaningful patient engagement. It provides insights, identifies opportunities for improvement, and recommends using the Patient Engagement in Research (PEIR) Framework, PEIR Plan Guide (workbook), and PEIRS-22 (scale) to guide and measure PRPs' engagement.

METHODS

Before the conference, the team held planning sessions and selected the Feel-Valued component of the PEIR Workbook for exploration. During OMERACT 2023, we discussed this topic using the PEIR Plan Guide in an interactive plenary session.

RESULTS

The plenary session produced 72 items from 14 breakout tables addressing PEIR Framework themes.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper highlights the role and evolution of PRPs in shaping research within OMERACT. It emphasizes enhancing and accurately measuring PRP engagement through the PEIR Framework, PEIR Plan Guide, and PEIRS-22. The insights and methodologies presented aim to fortify future PRP engagement, ensuring it aligns with OMERACT's principles of patient-centred research.

A mixed-methods study to evaluate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of delivering the optimal health program (OHP) for youth at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis: A study protocol

Individuals with clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis experience significant distress, impaired general functioning and a high lifetime risk of self-harm and attempted suicide. The CHR period is an important phase in an individual's mental health where appropriate interventions may reduce the risk of progression to several negative outcomes, including the development of schizophrenia. Given that up to 80% of individuals with CHR have another diagnosable mental illness and almost half experience poor psychosocial functioning, developing interventions that address psychosocial functioning in young people with CHR is of great importance. This mixed-methods study aims to employ qualitative and quantitative methods to adapt an evidence-based comprehensive psychosocial and mental health self-efficacy program, the Optimal Health Program (OHP), and evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary clinical efficacy in young people with CHR. We aim to recruit 30 CHR participants (age 16-29 years) in a single-arm 12-week exploratory clinical trial. Feasibility metrics will include recruitment, retention, and data completion rates. Acceptability will be informed by the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire. Clinical assessments (psychosis spectrum symptoms, depression, and anxiety), functional measures, and cognitive outcomes will be completed at study entry and repeated post-intervention at 12-weeks. We will run pre-post test data analysis to examine changes following engagement in the OHP intervention. Qualitative interviews will be conducted post-intervention to further evaluate the acceptability of the intervention and the trial design, and will be analyzed using thematic analysis. OHP may enhance the long-term mental health, well-being and functioning of CHR youth. However, the intervention must first be adapted to a CHR population; then, the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of delivering an intervention tailored around the varied needs of the CHR group must be established before a larger-scale appropriately powered study is pursued. Trial registration: The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05757128.

A critical reflection on using the Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS) to evaluate patient and family partners' engagement in dementia research

Introduction

Research involvement of people with lived experiences is increasing. Few tools are designed to evaluate their engagement in research. The Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS) is one of the few validated tools. Our team employed the PEIRS with patient and family partners with lived experiences of dementia every 6 months in a two-year telepresence robot project. This reflection paper reports our self-study on key learnings and proposes practical tips on using the PEIRS to evaluate patient and family partners' engagement in dementia research. It is the first to document a case using the PEIRS multiple times in a dementia research project.

Methods

Guided by Rolfe et al.'s reflective model, we conducted three team reflective sessions to examine the team's experiences using the PEIRS to improve and evaluate patient and family partners' engagement in the research. We also reviewed our meeting notes and fieldnotes documented in the research journal. A reflexive thematic analysis was performed.

Results

The team identified three key learnings: the values of using the PEIRS survey, the adaptations, and the factors influencing its implementation as an evaluation tool. Using the PEIRS provided significant benefits to the project, although some patient and family partners felt it was burdensome. The evaluation tool was enhanced with emojis and comment boxes based on suggestions from patient partners. The emojis introduced an element of fun, while the comment boxes allowed for personalized responses. Several factors influenced the PEIRS tool's effectiveness: the interviewer's identity, the confidentiality of responses and follow-ups, the timing and frequency of using the tool, and the presentation of the evaluations. These learnings led to the development of six practical tips,-"ENGAGE": Enjoyable and fun process, Never impose, Get prepared early, Adapt to the team's needs, Give people options, and Engage and reflect.

Conclusion

With the emerging trend of including people with lived experiences in dementia research, there is a need for ongoing assessment of engagement from both patient and family partners and the research team strategies. Future research can further explore survey logistics, co-development of evaluation tools, and the use of tools with people living with dementia.

Primus Inter PARES: First among equals-practical strategies for young adult PAtient RESearch partners (PARES) by young adult PARES

BACKGROUND

This manuscript is coauthored by 15 young adult Patient RESearch partners (PARES) with lived and living mental health experiences and three institutional researchers across Canada involved in a patient-oriented research (POR) study called the HEARTS Study: Helping Enable Access and Remove Barriers To Support for Young Adults with Mental Health-Related Disabilities. We share our reflections, experiences and lessons learned as we grapple with the field of POR for its lack of clarity, hierarchical structures, internalized ableism, and accessibility challenges, among others. To mitigate the difficulties of POR, we started by laying the groundwork for equality by embracing the principle of Primus Inter Pares: First Among Equals as the foundation of our approach. In this way, we began with what we know for certain: the inherent worth and dignity of young adults as equal partners, recognizing their expertise, worldviews, creativity, and capacity to contribute meaningfully and intentionally to the research that affects their lives and futures.

MAIN BODY

The manuscript underscores the need to reconceptualize meaningful engagement in POR, advocating a shift from traditional, biased paradigms that fail to address the complexities faced by young adults with mental illness. It introduces what we have termed Adaptive and Differential Engagement, underscoring the necessity of tailoring participation to individual preferences and circumstances alongside a Tripartite Compensation model that promotes fair and holistic remuneration in research collaborations. Then we discuss the approaches we have conceptualized, such as Equitable Dialogue, Trust Architecture, Community Continuum, Unity in Diversity, Shared Stewardship, and Agile Frameworks that collectively aim to overcome barriers like language intimidation, power imbalances, framework fatigue, consultation burnout, trust deficits, and systemic discrimination and exclusion. The manuscript does not seek to prescribe any universal or standardized solutions; in fact, it seeks the opposite. Instead, it offers a thoughtful and transparent contribution to the POR canon, providing resources for young adults eager to engage in research and institutional researchers aspiring to collaborate with them.

CONCLUSION

This manuscript is a product of our collective learning and critical self-evaluation. By integrating theoretical insights with practical strategies, we present a justice-oriented blueprint for an inclusive and egalitarian approach to POR. We advocate for applications of POR that are responsive to the individualized contexts of young adult PARES, ensuring their perspectives are central to the research with the resources to take the lead should they choose.

Meaningful Patient Engagement in Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Cancer Research: A Framework for Qualitative Studies

Over the last two decades, patient engagement in cancer research has evolved significantly, especially in addressing the unique challenges faced by adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer populations. This paper introduces a framework for meaningful engagement with AYA cancer patient research partners, drawing insights from the "FUTURE" Study, a qualitative study that utilizes focus groups to explore the impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment on the sexual and reproductive health of AYA cancer patients in Canada. The framework's development integrates insights from prior works and addresses challenges with patient engagement in research specific to AYA cancer populations. The framework is guided by overarching principles (safety, flexibility, and sensitivity) and includes considerations that apply across all phases of a research study (collaboration; iteration; communication; and equity, diversity, and inclusion) and tasks that apply to specific phases of a research study (developing, conducting, and translating the study). The proposed framework seeks to increase patient engagement in AYA cancer research beyond a supplementary aspect to an integral component for conducting research with impact on patients.

Using the Power Wheel as a transformative tool to promote equity through spaces and places of patient engagement

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement is the active collaboration between patient partners and health system partners towards a goal of making decisions that centre patient needs-thus improving experiences of care, and overall effectiveness of health services in alignment with the Quintuple Aim. An important but challenging aspect of patient engagement is including diverse perspectives particularly those experiencing health inequities. When such populations are excluded from decision-making in health policy, practice and research, we risk creating a healthcare ecosystem that reinforces structural marginalisation and perpetuates health inequities.

APPROACH

Despite the growing body of literature on knowledge coproduction, few have addressed the role of power relations in patient engagement and offered actionable steps for engaging diverse patients in an inclusive way with a goal of improving health equity. To fill this knowledge gap, we draw on theoretical concepts of power, our own experience codesigning a novel model of patient engagement that is equity promoting, Equity Mobilizing Partnerships in Community, and extensive experience as patient partners engaged across the healthcare ecosystem. We introduce readers to a new conceptual tool, the Power Wheel, that can be used to analyse the interspersion of power in the places and spaces of patient engagement.

CONCLUSION

As a tool for ongoing praxis (reflection +action), the Power Wheel can be used to report, reflect and resolve power asymmetries in patient-partnered projects, thereby increasing transparency and illuminating opportunities for equitable transformation and social inclusion so that health services can meet the needs and priorities of all people.

One size doesn't fit all: methodological reflections in conducting community-based behavioural science research to tailor COVID-19 vaccination initiatives for public health priority populations

BACKGROUND

Promoting the uptake of vaccination for infectious diseases such as COVID-19 remains a global challenge, necessitating collaborative efforts between public health units (PHUs) and communities. Applied behavioural science can play a crucial role in supporting PHUs' response by providing insights into human behaviour and informing tailored strategies to enhance vaccination uptake. Community engagement can help broaden the reach of behavioural science research by involving a more diverse range of populations and ensuring that strategies better represent the needs of specific communities. We developed and applied an approach to conducting community-based behavioural science research with ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations to guide PHUs in tailoring their strategies to promote COVID-19 vaccination. This paper presents the community engagement methodology and the lessons learned in applying the methodology.

METHODS

The community engagement methodology was developed based on integrated knowledge translation (iKT) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. The study involved collaboration with PHUs and local communities in Ontario, Canada to identify priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, understand factors influencing vaccine uptake and co-design strategies tailored to each community to promote vaccination. Community engagement was conducted across three large urban regions with individuals from Eastern European communities, African, Black, and Caribbean communities and low socioeconomic neighbourhoods.

RESULTS

We developed and applied a seven-step methodology for conducting community-based behavioural science research: (1) aligning goals with system-level partners; (2) engaging with PHUs to understand priorities; (3) understanding community strengths and dynamics; (4) building relationships with each community; (5) establishing partnerships (community advisory groups); (6) involving community members in the research process; and (7) feeding back and interpreting research findings. Research partnerships were successfully established with members of prioritized communities, enabling recruitment of participants for theory-informed behavioural science interviews, interpretation of findings, and co-design of targeted recommendations for each PHU to improve COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Lessons learned include the importance of cultural sensitivity and awareness of sociopolitical context in tailoring community engagement, being agile to address the diverse and evolving priorities of PHUs, and building trust to achieve effective community engagement.

CONCLUSION

Effective community engagement in behavioural science research can lead to more inclusive and representative research. The community engagement approach developed and applied in this study acknowledges the diversity of communities, recognizes the central role of PHUs, and can help in addressing complex public health challenges.

Evaluation of an integrated knowledge translation approach used for updating the Cochrane Review of Patient Decision Aids: a pre-post mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

When people who can use or benefit from research findings are engaged as partners on study teams, the quality and impact of findings are better. These people can include patients/consumers and clinicians who do not identify as researchers. They are referred to as "knowledge users". This partnered approach is called integrated knowledge translation (IKT). We know little about knowledge users' involvement in the conduct of systematic reviews. We aimed to evaluate team members' degree of meaningful engagement and their perceptions of having used an IKT approach when updating the Cochrane Review of Patient Decision Aids.

METHODS

We conducted a pre-post mixed methods study. We surveyed all team members at two time points. Before systematic review conduct, all participating team members indicated their preferred level of involvement within each of the 12 steps of the systematic review process from "Screen titles/abstracts" to "Provide feedback on draft article". After, they reported on their degree of satisfaction with their achieved level of engagement across each step and the degree of meaningful engagement using the Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS-22) across 7 domains scored from 100 (extremely meaningful engagement) to 0 (no meaningful engagement). We solicited their experiences with the IKT approach using open-ended questions. We analyzed quantitative data descriptively and qualitative data using content analysis. We triangulated data at the level of study design and interpretation.

RESULTS

Of 21 team members, 20 completed the baseline survey (95.2% response rate) and 17/20 (85.0% response rate) the follow-up survey. There were 11 (55%) researchers, 3 (15%) patients/consumers, 5 (25%) clinician-researchers, and 1 (5%) graduate student. At baseline, preferred level of involvement in the 12 systematic review steps varied from n = 3 (15%) (search grey literature sources) to n = 20 (100%) (provide feedback on the systematic review article). At follow-up, 16 (94.1%) participants were totally or very satisfied with the extent to which they were involved in these steps. All (17, 100%) agreed that the process was co-production. Total PEIRS-22 scores revealed most participants reported extremely (13, 76.4%) or very (2, 11.8%) meaningful degree of engagement. Triangulated data revealed that participants indicated benefit to having been engaged in an authentic research process that incorporated diverse perspectives, resulting in better and more relevant outputs. Reported challenges were about time, resources, and the logistics of collaborating with a large group.

CONCLUSION

Following the use of an IKT approach during the conduct of a systematic review, team members reported high levels of meaningful engagement. These results contribute to our understanding of ways to co-produce systematic reviews.

Evaluating patient participation in value-based healthcare: Current state and lessons learned

INTRODUCTION

Value-based healthcare (VBHC) focusses on increasing value for patients. Hospitals aim to implement VBHC via value improvement (VI) teams for medical conditions. To determine the patient's perspective on value, collective patient participation is important in these teams. We therefore evaluated the current state of patient participation in VI teams and share lessons learned.

METHODS

This mixed-methods study was conducted at seven collaborating hospitals in the Netherlands. A questionnaire (the public and patient engagement evaluation tool) was tailored to the study's context, completed by VI team members (n = 147 from 76 different VI teams) and analysed with descriptive statistics. In addition, 30 semistructured interviews were held with VI team members and analysed through thematic analysis. Data were collected between February 2022 and January 2023 and were triangulated by mapping the quantitative results to the interview themes.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight of the 76 included VI teams reported using a form of patient participation. Many respondents (71%) indicated a lack of a clear strategy and goal for patient participation. Multiple VI team members believed that specific knowledge and skills are required for patients to participate in a VI team, but this led to concerns regarding the representativeness of participating patients. Furthermore, while patients indicated that they experienced some level of hierarchy, they also stated that they did not feel restricted hereby. Lastly, patients were satisfied with their participation and felt like equal VI team members (100%), but they did mention a lack of feedback from the VI team on their input.

CONCLUSION

The results imply the lack of full implementation of patient participation within VI teams. Guidelines should be developed that provide information on how to include a representative group of patients, which methods to use, how to evaluate the impact of patient participation, and how to give feedback to participating patients.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Two patient advisors were part of the research team and attended the research team meetings. They were involved as research partners in all phases of the study, including drafting the protocol (e.g., drafting interview guides and selecting the measurement instrument), interpreting the results and writing this article.

What guidance exists to support patient partner compensation practices? A scoping review of available policies and guidelines

BACKGROUND

An integral aspect of patient engagement in research, also known as patient and public involvement, is appropriately recognising patient partners for their contributions through compensation (e.g., coauthorship, honoraria). Despite known benefits to compensating patient partners, our previous work suggested compensation is rarely reported and researchers perceive a lack of guidance on this issue. To address this gap, we identified and summarised available guidance and policy documents for patient partner compensation.

METHODS

We conducted this scoping review in accordance with methods suggested by the JBI. We searched the grey literature (Google, Google Scholar) in March 2022 and Overton (an international database of policy documents) in April 2022. We included articles, guidance or policy documents regarding the compensation of patient partners for their research contributions. Two reviewers independently extracted and synthesised document characteristics and recommendations.

RESULTS

We identified 65 guidance or policy documents. Most documents were published in Canada (57%, n = 37) or the United Kingdom (26%, n = 17). The most common recommended methods of nonfinancial compensation were offering training opportunities to patient partners (40%, n = 26) and facilitating patient partner attendance at conferences (38%, n = 25). The majority of guidance documents (95%) suggested financially compensating (i.e., offering something of monetary value) patient partners for their research contributions. Across guidance documents, the recommended monetary value of financial compensation was relatively consistent and associated with the role played by patient partners and/or specific engagement activities. For instance, the median monetary value for obtaining patient partner feedback (i.e., consultation) was $19/h (USD) (range of $12-$50/h). We identified several documents that guide the compensation of specific populations, including youth and Indigenous peoples.

CONCLUSION

Multiple publicly available resources exist to guide researchers, patient partners and institutions in developing tailored patient partner compensation strategies. Our findings challenge the perception that a lack of guidance hinders patient partner financial compensation. Future efforts should prioritise the effective implementation of these compensation strategies to ensure that patient partners are appropriately recognised.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS

The patient partner coauthor informed protocol development, identified data items, and interpreted findings.

Patient partner perspectives on compensation: Insights from the Canadian Patient Partner Survey

INTRODUCTION

There is a growing role for patients, family members and caregivers as consultants, collaborators and partners in health system settings in Canada. However, compensation for this role is not systematized. When offered, it varies in both type (e.g., one-time honorarium, salary) and amount. Further, broad-based views of patient partners on compensation are still unknown. We aimed to describe the types and frequency of compensation patient partners have been offered and their attitudes towards compensation.

METHODS

This study uses data from the Canadian Patient Partner Study (CPPS) survey. The survey gathered the experiences and perspectives of those who self-identified as patient partners working across the Canadian health system. Three questions were about compensation, asking what types of compensation participants had been offered, if they had ever refused compensation, and whether they felt adequately compensated. The latter two questions included open-text comments in addition to menu-based and scaled response options. Basic frequencies were performed for all questions and open-text comments were analyzed through inductive qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 603 individuals participated in the CPPS survey. Most respondents were never or rarely offered salary (81%), honorarium (64%), gift cards (80%) or material gifts (93%) while half were offered conference registration and expenses at least sometimes. A total of 129 (26%) of 499 respondents reported refusing compensation. Of 511 respondents, half felt adequately compensated always or often, and half only sometimes, rarely or never. Open-text comments revealed positive, ambivalent and negative attitudes towards compensation. Attitudes were framed by perceptions about their role, sentiments of giving back to the health system, feelings of acknowledgement, practical considerations, values of fairness and equity and accountability relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm that compensation is not standardized in Canada. Half of survey respondents routinely feel inadequately compensated. Patient partners have diverse views of what constitutes adequate compensation inclusive of personal considerations such as a preference for volunteering, and broader concerns such as promoting equity in patient partnership. Organizations should attempt to ensure that compensation practices are clear, transparent and attentive to patient partners' unique contexts.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

Two patient partners are members of the CPPS research team and have been fully engaged in all study phases from project conception to knowledge translation. They are co-authors of this manuscript. The survey was co-designed and pilot tested with patient partners and survey participants were patient partners.

Patient, Family, Caregiver, and Community Engagement in Research: A Sensibility Evaluation of a Novel Infographic and Planning Guide

Background

Engaging patients, families, caregivers, and the community (PFCCs) throughout the research cycle ensures that research is meaningful for the target population. Although tools have been developed to promote PFCC engagement, many are lengthy, complex, and lack recommended behaviours. This study evaluated the sensibility of an infographic and accompanying planning guide for facilitating engagement of PFCCs in research.

Methods

Thirteen rehabilitation researchers reviewed the PFCC engagement tool and planning guide, participated in a semi-structured interview, and completed a 10-item sensibility questionnaire. Interviews were transcribed, imported into NVivo, and analyzed using direct content analysis. Median scores and proportions of responses for each of the 10 items in the questionnaire were calculated.

Results

Median scores for all questionnaire items were ≥ 4 on a 7-point Likert Scale. Participants reported the tool was easy to navigate, contained relevant items to promote PFCC engagement, and followed a logical sequence. Suggested modifications of the tool related to formatting, design, and changing the title.

Conclusions

The tool was deemed sensible for overt format, purpose and framework, face and content validity, and ease of usage and provides guidance to engage PFCCs across the research cycle. Further studies are recommended to assess the effectiveness of the tool to engage PFCCs in research.

Community Engagement in Research: An Updated Systematic Review of Quantitative Engagement Measurement Scales for Health Studies

Though the interest in community engagement in research (CEnR) protocols has increased, studies reporting on the findings of tested CEnR engagement measurement scales for health studies are sparse. A systematic review was conducted from January 1 to March 1, 2023, to identify validated, quantitative CEnR engagement measurement tools for health studies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology was employed. The rigor of scale development, testing, and implementation was explored, and a `best practices evaluation conducted. Themes on the readiness of scales for implementation in health research studies were narratively compiled. Nineteen studies met the search inclusion criteria-reporting on the development, testing, and implementation of seven CEnR engagement measurement scales for health studies. Scale implementation studies precipitated only two of the studies. None of the scales followed the rigorous process dictated in best practices; however, at this time, three scales have gone through the most robust testing processes. Advancement of the science of engagement measurement requires consensus on terminology, application of best practices for scale development and testing protocols, and consistency of reporting findings.

Patient involvement in research within the Gynecological Cancer InterGroup: A call to action for a systematic approach: Results from a survey

Background and Aims

Involving patients in research, not only as trial subjects, is not a newly established practice. Over the last two decades, patient roles have gradually expanded to become active research contributors, creating a more patient-centered research landscape. Our survey has explored the scope of patient involvement within the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG), an International Gynecologic Cancer Research Consortium, and identified challenges in developing a systematic, meaningful and sustainable level of patient involvement.

Methods

In late 2019, the GCIG Harmonisation Operations Committee conducted an online survey across 26 national and/or international research cooperative groups, aiming to identify current patient involvement practices implemented by each group. Twelve questions were asked. The results have been generated to support a systematic strategic planning process to increase patient involvement into clinical research projects.

Results

More than half of the 26 participating groups have either already involved (15, [58%]) or are planning (6, [23%]) to involve patients in their research activities. Gaining patient support in raising public awareness around clinical trials appears to be one of the most desired benefits (21, [81%]). Ten respondents managed to integrate patient involvement into their standard practice. When involving patients in research the groups mostly consider that patients bring added value to the study (19, [73%]), although only eight groups (40%) have a well-organized process in doing so.

Conclusion

Even though patient involvement is considered a significant added value to clinical research, its application within GCIG groups is not considered on a regular basis and is predominantly limited to operational aspects of research activities. The lack of resources and expertize, as well as the missing well-organized and structured process of some groups, combined with their ability to ensure process sustainability, are among the main factors affecting implementation and adoption of patient involvement within GCIG research activities.

Barriers and facilitators of meaningful patient participation at the collective level in healthcare organizations: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Collective patient participation, such as patient participation in policy making, has become increasingly important to achieve high-quality care. However, there is little knowledge on how to let patients participate in a meaningful manner at this level. The aim of this systematic literature review was to provide an overview of barriers, facilitators, and associated impact of collective patient participation.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE were searched until May 2023 for studies that evaluated collective patient participation. Study characteristics, methods for patient participation, barriers and facilitators, and impact (if measured) of patient participation were extracted from the articles.

RESULTS

We included 59 articles. Identified barriers and facilitators of collective patient participation were grouped into five categories: (1) preconditions for patient participation, (2) strategy for patient participation, (3) preparation of patients and staff for patient participation, (4) support for patients and staff during patient participation, and (5) evaluation of patient participation. Impact of patient participation was reported in 34 included studies at three levels: quality of care and research, the team and organization, and the participants themselves. Only three studies reported quantitative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Interestingly, similar challenges were experienced during a period of twenty years, indicating that little progress has been made in structuring patient participation. Our overview of barriers and facilitators will therefore help to improve and structure collective patient participation.

Lived experience adaptation of a psychosocial intervention for young adults with bipolar spectrum disorders: Process description and adaptation outcomes

AIM

Lived experience adaptation of mental health interventions can help ensure that the intervention is appropriate for the target population. This paper describes a youth-led adaptation of a self-stigma reduction intervention for young adults with bipolar spectrum disorders, that is, Narrative Enhancement and Cognitive Therapy.

METHODS

Standard guidelines for youth engagement were followed. A youth lived experience adaptation lead and a five-member youth lived experience advisory panel reviewed the intervention and made a number of adaptations to increase its relevance for young people with bipolar disorders. A brief evaluation of the engagement process was conducted.

RESULTS

The primary adaptations made to the intervention fell into five areas: (1) wording revisions for recovery-oriented language accessible to youth with a wide variety of language and literacy levels; (2) updating and tailoring to the diagnostic category, with the addition of new quotes describing the lived experience of stigma; (3) integration of a new, engaging graphic design; (4) development of a goal-setting module, as recommended by the research team; and (5) identification of the role of a peer co-facilitator. An evaluation of the engagement process showed that the engagement was extremely meaningful for the youth engaged.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a youth lived experience adaptation process, young people can make relevant, important changes to a psychosocial intervention. The resulting early intervention materials are research-ready and are hypothesized to meet the needs of young people with BD in a youth-friendly manner. Research on the acceptability, efficacy, and effectiveness of the newly adapted intervention will be required.

Maximizing the value of patient and public involvement in the digital health co-design process: A qualitative descriptive study with design leaders and patient-public partners

Digital health interventions have enormous potential to support patients and the public in achieving their health goals. Nonetheless, many digital health interventions are failing to effectively engage patients and the public. One solution that has been proposed is to directly involve patients and the public in the design process of these digital health interventions. Although there is consensus that involving patients and the public in collaborative design is valuable, design teams have little guidance on how to maximize the value of their collaborative design work. The main objective of this study was to understand how the value of patient and public involvement in digital health design can be maximized, from the perspective of design leaders and patient-public partners. Using a qualitative descriptive methodology, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 design leaders and 9 patient-public partners. Interviewees agreed that involving patients and the public was valuable, however, they questioned if current collaborative methods were optimized to ensure maximal value. Interviewees suggested that patient and public collaborative design can add value through four different mechanisms: (1) by allowing the design process to be an empowering intervention itself, (2) by ensuring that the digital health intervention will be effectively engaging for users, (3) by ensuring that the digital health intervention will be seamlessly implemented in practice, and (4) by allowing patient-public collaborations extend beyond the initial product design. Overall, interviewees emphasized that although collaborative design has historically focused on improving the digital health product itself, patients and the public have crucial insights on implementation planning as well as how collaborative design can be used as its own empowering intervention. The results of this paper provide clarity about the ways that patient and public collaborative design can be made more valuable. Digital health design teams can use these results to be more intentional about their collaborative design approaches.

Recognizing patient partner contributions to health research: a systematic review of reported practices

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement in research refers to collaboration between researchers and patients (i.e., individuals with lived experience including informal caregivers) in developing or conducting research. Offering non-financial (e.g., co-authorship, gift) or financial (e.g., honoraria, salary) compensation to patient partners can demonstrate appreciation for patient partner time and effort. However, little is known about how patient partners are currently compensated for their engagement in research. We sought to assess the prevalence of reporting patient partner compensation, specific compensation practices (non-financial and financial) reported, and identify benefits, challenges, barriers and enablers to offering financial compensation.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of studies citing the Guidance for Reporting the Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP I and II) reporting checklists (October 2021) within Web of Science and Scopus. Studies that engaged patients as research partners were eligible. Two independent reviewers screened full texts and extracted data from included studies using a standardized data abstraction form. Data pertaining to compensation methods (financial and non-financial) and reported barriers and enablers to financially compensating patient partners were extracted. No formal quality assessment was conducted since the aim of the review is to describe the scope of patient partner compensation. Quantitative data were presented descriptively, and qualitative data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

The search identified 843 studies of which 316 studies were eligible. Of the 316 studies, 91% (n = 288) reported offering a type of compensation to patient partners. The most common method of non-financial compensation reported was informal acknowledgement on research outputs (65%, n = 206) and co-authorship (49%, n = 156). Seventy-nine studies (25%) reported offering financial compensation (i.e., honoraria, salary), 32 (10%) reported offering no financial compensation, and 205 (65%) studies did not report on financial compensation. Two key barriers were lack of funding to support compensation and absence of institutional policy or guidance. Two frequently reported enablers were considering financial compensation when developing the project budget and adequate project funding.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of published studies reporting patient engagement in research, most offered non-financial methods of compensation to patient partners. Researchers may need guidance and support to overcome barriers to offering financial compensation.

"I think there has to be a mutual respect for there to be value": Evaluating patient engagement in a national clinical trial on de-implementation of low value care

BACKGROUND

The evaluation of patient engagement in research is understudied and under-reported, making it difficult to know what engagement strategies work best and when. We provide the results of an evaluation of patient engagement in a large Canadian research program focused on the de-implementation of low-value care. We aimed to evaluate the experience and impact of patient engagement in the study.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey was administered using Microsoft Forms to (1) researchers and study staff and (2) patient partners. The survey was developed following iterative reviews by the project's patient partnership council and evaluation committee. Survey content areas included opinions on patient engagement to date, including challenges to engagement and suggestions for improvement. Patient partners also evaluated the partnership council. Descriptive statistics including counts and percentages described Likert scale survey items, while open comments were analyzed using descriptive content analysis.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 46% (17/37). There were positive attitudes about the value of patient engagement in this project. There was also a high degree of willingness to be involved with patient engagement in future projects, whether as a patient partner or as a researcher including patients on the research team. Most patient partners felt their contributions to the project were valued by researchers and study research staff. Open comments revealed that a co-design approach and full inclusion on the research team were integral to demonstrating the value of patient partner input. Areas for improvement included more frequent and ongoing communication among all team members, as well as earlier training about patient engagement, particularly addressing role expectations and role clarity.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data revealed that despite some challenges, team members recognized the value of patient engagement in research and agreed project decisions had been impacted by patient partner input. Ongoing communication was highlighted as an area for improvement, as well as earlier training and ongoing support for all team members, but particularly researchers and study staff. In response to evaluation data, the team has reinstated a quarterly newsletter and plans to use specific patient engagement planning templates across study sites for all project activities. These tools should help make expectations clear for all team members and contribute to a positive patient engagement experience. Findings can inform patient engagement planning and evaluation for other health research projects.

Cocreation of Assistive Technologies for Patients With Long COVID: Qualitative Analysis of a Literature Review on the Challenges of Patient Involvement in Health and Nursing Sciences

BACKGROUND

Digital assistive technologies have the potential to address the pressing need for adequate therapy options for patients with long COVID (also known as post-COVID-19 condition) by enabling the implementation of individual and independent rehabilitation programs. However, the involvement of the target patient group is necessary to develop digital devices that are closely aligned to the needs of this particular patient group.

OBJECTIVE

Participatory design approaches, such as cocreation, may be a solution for achieving usability and user acceptance. However, there are currently no set methods for implementing cocreative development processes incorporating patients. This study addresses the following research questions: what are the tasks and challenges associated with the involvement of patient groups? What lessons can be learned regarding the adequate involvement of patients with long COVID?

METHODS

First, a literature review based on a 3-stage snowball process was conducted to identify the tasks and challenges emerging in the context of the cocreation of digital assistive devices and services with patient groups. Second, a qualitative analysis was conducted in an attempt to extract relevant findings and criteria from the identified studies. Third, using the method of theory adaptation, this paper presents recommendations for the further development of the existing concepts of cocreation in relation to patients with long COVID.

RESULTS

The challenges of an active involvement of patients in cocreative development in health care include hierarchical barriers and differences in the levels of specific knowledge between professionals and patients. In the case of long COVID, patients themselves are still inexperienced in dealing with their symptoms and are hardly organized into established groups. This amplifies general hurdles and leads to questions of group identity, power structure, and knowledge creation, which are not sufficiently addressed by the current methods of cocreation.

CONCLUSIONS

The adaptation of transdisciplinary methods to cocreative development approaches focusing on collaborative and inclusive communication can address the recurring challenges of actively integrating patients with long COVID into development processes.

Co-building a training programme to facilitate patient, family and community partnership on research grants: A patient-oriented research project

INTRODUCTION

Patient engagement in patient-oriented research (POR) is described as patients collaborating as active and equal research team members (patient research partners [PRPs]) on the health research projects and activities that matter to them. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Canada's federal funding agency for health research, asks that patients be included as partners early, often and at as many stages of the health research process as possible. The objective of this POR project was to co-build an interactive, hands-on training programme that could support PRPs in understanding the processes, logistics and roles of CIHR grant funding applications. We also conducted a patient engagement evaluation, capturing the experiences of the PRPs in co-building the training programme.

METHODS

This multiphased POR study included a Working Group of seven PRPs with diverse health and health research experiences and two staff members from the Patient Engagement Team. Seven Working Group sessions were held over the 3-month period from June to August 2021. The Working Group worked synchronously (meeting weekly online via Zoom) as well as asynchronously. A patient engagement evaluation was conducted after the conclusion of the Working Group sessions using a validated survey and semi-structured interviews. Survey data were analysed descriptively and interview data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

The Working Group co-built and co-delivered the training programme about the CIHR grant application process for PRPs and researchers in five webinars and workshops. For the evaluation of patient engagement within the Working Group, five out of seven PRPs completed the survey and four participated in interviews. From the survey, most PRPs agreed/strongly agreed to having communication and supports to engage in the Working Group. The main themes identified from the interviews were working together-communication and supports; motivations for joining and staying; challenges to contributing; and impact of the Working Group.

CONCLUSION

This training programme supports and builds capacity for PRPs to understand the grant application process and offers ways by which they can highlight the unique experience and contribution they can bring to each project. Our co-build process presents an example and highlights the need for inclusive approaches, flexibility and individual thinking and application.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The objective of this project was to identify the aspects of the CIHR grant funding application that were elemental to having PRPs join grant funding applications and subsequently funded projects, in more active and meaningful roles, and then to co-build a training programme that could support PRPs to do so. We used the CIHR SPOR Patient Engagement Framework, and included time and trust, in our patient engagement approaches to building a mutually respectful and reciprocal co-learning space. Our Working Group included seven PRPs who contributed to the development of a training programme. We suggest that our patient engagement and partnership approaches, or elements of, could serve as a useful resource for co-building more PRP-centred learning programmes and tools going forward.

The Involvement of Service Users and People With Lived Experience in Mental Health Care Innovation Through Design: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Mental health care faces challenges that not only necessitate innovation but also require the involvement of service users and people with lived experience in developing and evaluating mental health care services. As the development of digital interventions is becoming more prevalent, design approaches are increasingly finding their way into mental health. There is evidence that these approaches can successfully integrate user experience into mental health services. However, there is no clear overview of the studies conducted and the lessons learned concerning the involvement of service users and people with lived experience.

OBJECTIVE

In this systematic review, we aimed to provide an overview of the involvement of service users and people with lived experience in mental health care services through design approaches and to synthesize the advantages of design approaches in mental health care.

METHODS

The following 5 databases were searched for relevant abstracts: PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase. In addition, 2 health design journal archives, Design for Health and The Journal of Health Design, were searched. To categorize the results, we collected the reported added value from the included articles and conducted a thematic synthesis in which the themes were developed from the retrieved data. The themes were discussed, revised, and checked until saturation was achieved.

RESULTS

We included and categorized 33 papers. Most studies involved service users, primarily adults, and used various design approaches. Most of these studies aimed to design or evaluate digital interventions. Service users and people with lived experience were involved in different roles but never as decision makers. Studies that used co-design approaches exhibited the highest levels of involvement. Various added values were reported, including tailoring and testing interventions and digital interventions, improving engagement and collaboration, gathering the needs of stakeholders, and empowering participants as resourceful actors. The challenges reported were maintaining participants' continued participation throughout the study, managing the iterative nature of design, providing a safe space, balancing insights from design and medical science, and navigating design processes in medical environments.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provides an overview of the studies that used design approaches to involve service users and people with lived experience in mental health care innovation. Design approaches have advantages in mental health care innovation, offering added value and having manageable challenges. Future studies using design approaches in mental health care should involve participants as partners and decision makers and report on collaboration in a systematic and clear manner.

Delivery and evaluation of simulations to promote authentic and meaningful engagement in childhood disability research

BACKGROUND

In 2019, our interdisciplinary team of researchers, family members, and youth co-designed four simulation training videos and accompanying facilitation resources to prepare youth, family members, trainees, and researchers to build the knowledge and skills to engage in patient-oriented research (POR) authentically and meaningfully. Videos covered challenges in aspects of the research process including (1) forming a project team; (2) identifying project objectives and priorities; (3) agreeing on results; and (4) carrying out knowledge translation.

METHODS

The purpose of the study was to deliver four simulation training videos across 2 two-hour facilitated workshops with researchers, trainees, and family partners. We evaluated whether the training videos and facilitated discussion of the simulations helped to improve knowledge and attitudes about authentic and meaningful partnership in research and self-perceived ability to engage in POR. An explanatory sequential two-phase mixed methods design was used. Phase 1 (quantitative) included two training workshops and a pre/post-training survey. Phase 2 (qualitative) included two qualitative focus groups. Results of each phase were analyzed separately and then combined during interpretation.

RESULTS

Sixteen individuals (including researchers/research staff, trainees, family members, clinicians) took part in this research study. Overall, participants were highly receptive to the training, providing high scores on measures of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility. While the training videos and facilitated discussion of the simulations were found to increase participants' knowledge and ability to engage in authentic and meaningful POR, we found no significant change in attitude or intent. Recommendations about the simulation content and delivery were provided to inform for future use.

CONCLUSIONS

The simulations were found to be a positive and impactful way for collaborative research teams to build knowledge and ability to engage in authentic and meaningful POR. Recommendations for future work include covering different content areas with varying levels of nuance; and offering the training to stakeholders in a variety of roles, such as those higher-ranked academic positions.

Youth engagement in research: exploring training needs of youth with neurodevelopmental disabilities

BACKGROUND

Authentic researcher-youth partnerships in patient-oriented research (POR) where the research responds to the needs expressed by youth themselves are essential to make research meaningful. While patient-oriented research (POR) is increasingly practiced, few training programs exist in Canada and none, to our knowledge, are tailored for youth with neurodevelopmental disabilities (NDD). Our primary objective was to explore the training needs of youth (ages 18-25) with NDD to enhance their knowledge, confidence, and skills as research partners. Our secondary objective was to identify the benefits and challenges of engaging youth with NDD in a POR approach.

METHODS

Our team of four youth and one parent with lived experience [Youth Engagement in Research (YER) partners] and six researchers engaged in POR to investigate the primary objective via two phases: (1) individual interviews with youth living with NDD and (2) a two-day virtual symposium with focus groups with youth and researchers. Collaborative qualitative content analysis was employed to synthesize the data. Our secondary objective was assessed by asking our YER partners to complete the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PPEET) survey and participate in reflective discussions.

RESULTS

Phase 1 participants (n = 7) identified various barriers and facilitators to their engagement in research and offered suggestions to meet their needs through minimizing barriers and integrating facilitators, which would subsequently enhance their knowledge, confidence, and skills as research partners. Informed by phase 1, phase 2 participants (n = 17) prioritized the following POR training needs: researcher-youth communication, research roles and responsibilities, and finding partnership opportunities. For delivery methods, participants stated the importance of youth representation, using Universal Design for Learning, and co-learning between youth and researchers. Based on the PPEET data and subsequent discussions, YER partners agreed that they were able to express views freely, feel that their views were heard, and that their participation made a meaningful difference. Challenges included scheduling difficulties, ensuring multiple methods for engagement, and working under short timelines.

CONCLUSION

This study identified important training needs for youth with NDD and for researchers to engage in meaningful POR, which can subsequently inform the co-production of accessible training opportunities with and for youth.

Researcher-patient partnership generated actionable recommendations, using quantitative evaluation and deliberative dialogue, to improve meaningful engagement

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate how the 22-item Patient Engagement in Research Scale (PEIRS-22) can be used to develop recommendations for improving the meaningfulness of patient engagement.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

PEIRS-22 previously captured quantitative evaluation data from 15 patient partners in a self-study of the Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) Evidence Alliance. Guided by deliberative dialogue, the current study involved 3 steps: (1) In-depth analysis and interpretation of the PEIRS-22 data produced a lay evidence summary with identified areas for improvement of meaningful engagement; (2) A 3-hour virtual workshop with patient partners and researchers generated initial recommendations; and (3) In two successive post-workshop surveys, ratings by workshop invitees led to consensus on the recommendations.

RESULTS

Twenty-five participants attended the workshops and dialogued on 8 areas for improvement identified from the PEIRS-22 data. Twenty-eight unique initial recommendations led to consensus on 14 key recommendations organized across 4 categories: setting expectations for all team members, building trust and ongoing communication, providing opportunities to enhance learning and to develop skills, and acknowledging contributions of patient partners.

CONCLUSION

Using PEIRS-22 data within a deliberate dialogue elucidated 14 actionable recommendations to support ongoing improvement of patient engagement at SPOR Evidence Alliance, a pan-Canadian health research initiative.

From FITT to FISTT: The task-skills fit before the introduction of assistive, digital health technologies

Objective

To enhance the predictive power of the Fit between Individuals, Task and Technology (FITT) framework in mobile, individual consumer settings by restructuring the individual-task fit to prominently emphasise the task-skills fit.

Design

A mixed study involving a quantitative survey of 679 potential patients (adopters) and a qualitative content analysis of ten semi-structured interviews with clinic assistants.

Setting

For the survey, three combined random samples of potential patients from Atteridgeville, Bapong and Garankuwa (South Africa). Ten Unjani clinic assistants were also interviewed about their tasks, skills, and related properties and attributes using a semi-structured interview guide.

Participants

Participants in the survey were potential patients over 18 years of age in the three sampled locations. In the qualitative study, interviewed participants were employed as clinic assistants in ten clinics within the Unjani Clinic Network.

Main outcome measures

in the quantitative study, the statistical significance of the relationships between smartphone experience and health motivation on the one hand and the adopter's perceived self-efficacy on the other. In the qualitative study, the extent to which task properties, context, and the adopters' levels of education and training affect their perceived self-efficacy.

Findings

There is a significant relationship between smartphone experience and perceived self-efficacy and a moderately significant relationship between health motivation and perceived self-efficacy. Furthermore, task properties, task context, and an adopter's level of education and training considerably influence their perceived self-efficacy on a given future assistive digital health technology (ADHT).

Conclusion

Extending the FITT to the FISTT framework to explicitly include the task-skills fit may improve the explanatory and predictive power of the traditional FITT framework in mobile individual consumer settings.

The dynamic nature of patient engagement within a Canadian patient-oriented kidney health research network: Perspectives of researchers and patient partners

INTRODUCTION

Canadians Seeking Solutions and Innovations to Overcome Chronic Kidney Disease (Can-SOLVE CKD) is a pan-Canadian health research network that engages patients as partners across 18 unique projects and core infrastructure. In this qualitative study, we explored how research teams integrated patient partners into network research activities to inform our patient engagement approach.

METHODS

To capture a breadth of perspectives, this qualitative descriptive study purposively sampled researchers and patient partners across 18 network research teams. We conducted 4 focus groups (2 patients and 2 researchers; n = 26) and 28 individual telephone interviews (n = 12 patient partners; n = 16 researchers). Transcripts were coded in duplicate, and themes were developed through an inductive, thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

We included 24 patient partners and 24 researchers from 17 of the 18 projects and all core committees within the network. Overarching concepts relate participants' initial impressions and uncertainty about patient engagement to an evolving appreciation of its value, impact and sustainability. We identified four themes with subthemes that characterized the dynamic nature of patient engagement and how participants integrated patients across network initiatives: (1) Reinforcing a shared purpose (learning together, collective commitment, evolving attitudes); (2) Fostering a culture of responsive and innovative research (accessible supports, strengthened process and product); (3) Aligning priorities, goals and needs (amenability to patient involvement, mutually productive relationships, harmonizing expectations); (4) Building a path to sustainability (value creation, capacity building, sustaining knowledge use).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate the dynamic and adaptive processes related to patient engagement within a national, patient-oriented kidney health research network. Optimization of support structures and capacity are key factors to promote sustainability of engagement processes within and beyond the network.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This project was conceived in collaboration with a Can-SOLVE CKD patient partner (N. F.), with lived experience of kidney failure. He also co-designed the study's protocol, led focus groups and researcher interviews, and contributed to data analysis. L. G. has lived experience as a caregiver for a person with CKD and facilitated patient partner focus groups. The patient partners, both of whom are listed authors, provided important insights that shaped our interpretation and presentation of study findings.

Video Conferencing With Residents and Families for Care Planning During COVID-19: Experiences in Canadian Long-Term Care

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Government-mandated health and safety restrictions to mitigate the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) intensified challenges in caring for older adults in long-term care (LTC) without family/care partners. This article describes the experiences of a multidisciplinary research team in implementing an evidence-based intervention for family-centered, team-based, virtual care planning-PIECESTM approach-into clinical practice. We highlight challenges and considerations for implementation science to support care practices for older adults in LTC, their families, and the workforce.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A qualitative descriptive design was used. Data included meetings with LTC directors and Registered Practical Nurses (i.e., licensed nurse who graduated with a 2-year diploma program that allows them to provide basic nursing care); one-on-one interviews with family/care partners, residents, Registered Practical Nurses, and PIECES mentors; and reflections of the academic team. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research provided sensitizing constructs for deductive coding, while an inductive approach also allowed themes to emerge.

RESULTS

Findings highlighted how aspects related to planning, engagement, execution, reflection, and evaluation influenced the implementation process from the perspectives of stakeholders. Involving expert partners on the research team to bridge research and practice, developing relationships from a distance, empowering frontline champions, and adapting to challenging circumstances led to shared commitments for intervention success.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Lessons learned include the significance of stakeholder involvement throughout all research activities, the importance of clarity around expectations of all team members, and the consequence of readiness for implementation with respect to circumstances (e.g., COVID-19) and capacity for change.

Patient Engagement in Health Research: Perspectives from Patient Participants

Background and purpose: Over the past decade, patient engagement (PE) has emerged as an important way to help improve the relevance, quality, and impact of health research. However, there is limited consensus on how best to meaningfully engage patients in the research process. The goal of this article is to share our experiences and insights as members of a Patient Advisory Committee (PAC) on a large, multidisciplinary cancer research study that has spanned six years. We hope by sharing our reflections of the PAC experiences, we can highlight successes, challenges, and lessons learned to help guide PE in future health research. To the best of our knowledge, few publications describing PE experiences in health research teams have been written by patients, survivors, or family caregivers themselves. Methods: A qualitative approach was used to gather reflections from members of the Patient Advisory Committee regarding their experiences in participating in a research study over six years. Each member completed an online survey and engaged in a group discussion based on the emergent themes from the survey responses. Results: Our reflections about experiences as a PAC on a large, pan-Canadian research study include three overarching topics (1) what worked well; (2) areas for improvement; and (3) reflections on our overall contribution and impact. Overall, we found the experience positive and experienced personal satisfaction but there were areas where future improvements could be made. These areas include earlier engagement and training in the research process, more frequent communication between the patient committee and the research team, and on-going monitoring regarding the nature of the patient engagement. Conclusions: Engaging individuals who have experienced the types of events which are the focus of a research study can contribute to the overall relevance of the project. However, intentional efforts are necessary to ensure satisfactory involvement.

Stigma as a barrier to early intervention among youth seeking mental health services in Ontario, Canada: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Stigma associated with mental health challenges is a major barrier to service seeking among youth. Understanding how stigma impacts service-seeking decisions from the perspectives of youth remains underexplored. Such research is necessary to inform effective stigma reduction.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to understand how stigma influences service seeking among youth with mental health challenges.

METHODS

Qualitative inquiry was taken using youth engagement, underpinned by pragmatism. Data were collected via 4 virtual focus groups with 22 purposively selected youth participants with lived experience of mental health challenges in Ontario, Canada. Focus group guides were developed collaboratively among research team members, including youth co-researchers. Data were analyzed inductively using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three main themes were constructed from the data: point of entry into the system, being biomedicalized or trivialized, and paving the way for non-stigmatizing services. Initial contact with the mental healthcare system was seen to be affected by stigma, causing participants to delay contact or be refused services if they do not fit with an expected profile. Participants described a constant negotiation between feeling 'sick enough' and 'not sick enough' to receive services. Once participants accessed services, they perceived the biomedicalization or trivialization of their challenges to be driven by stigma. Lastly, participants reflected on changes needed to reduce stigma's effects on seeking and obtaining services.

CONCLUSION

A constant negotiation between being 'sick enough' or 'not sick enough' is a key component of stigma from the perspectives of youth. This tension influences youth decisions about whether to seek services, but also service provider decisions about whether to offer services. Building awareness around the invisibility of mental health challenges and the continuum of wellness to illness may help to break down stigma's impact as a barrier to service seeking. Early intervention models of care that propose services across the spectrum of challenges may prevent the sense of stigma that deters youth from accessing and continuing to access services.

Perspective of Patients and Stakeholders as Members of a Research Team

Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare orphan disease, characterized by skin thickening, vascular insufficiency, and fibrosis of internal organs. SSc affects about 100,000 people in the United States. This study explored perceived benefits and challenges of patient partners and stakeholders, who were team members on a project to revise and test a self-management program (Taking Charge of Systemic Sclerosis). Five patient partners, 1 stakeholder from the Scleroderma Foundation and 1 stakeholder from a state chapter of the Scleroderma Foundation were interviewed. Conversations were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim and analyzed. Four themes emerged from the analysis with corresponding subthemes: contributions to study, benefits of involvement, challenges, and project leadership. The themes and subthemes were generally similar to those expressed in other studies. However, additional benefits from engagement were identified: acceptance, increased knowledge of SSc, and helping others. Participants reported feeling supported and valued as members of the team and that their opinions mattered which is in contrast with findings from other studies.

Codesigning simulations and analyzing the process to ascertain principles of authentic and meaningful research engagement in childhood disability research

BACKGROUND

Including youth with disabilities and their families as partners in childhood disability research is imperative but can be challenging to do in an authentic and meaningful way. Simulation allows individuals to learn in a controlled environment and provides an opportunity to try new approaches. The objectives of the research study were to (1) codesign a suite of simulations and facilitation resources and understand how stakeholders engaged in the codesign process; and (2) describe the principles of authentic and meaningful research engagement as identified by stakeholders.

METHODS

Interdisciplinary stakeholder groups, including youth with disabilities, parents, researchers, and trainees, codesigned simulation training videos by developing shared storylines about challenges with research engagement that were then performed and digitally recorded with standardized patient actors. Two forms of data were collected: (1) observations via field notes and video recordings were analyzed to understand the codesign process; and (2) interviews were analyzed to understand principles of authentic and meaningful engagement.

RESULTS

Four simulation training videos were developed, and topics included: (1) forming a project team; (2) identifying project objectives and priorities; (3) reviewing results; and (4) navigating concerns about knowledge translation. Thirteen participants participated in the simulation codesign; nine of whom consented to be observed in the codesign process and seven who completed follow up interviews. We identified two themes about authentic and meaningful engagement in research: (1) whether the invitation to engage on a project was authentic and meaningful or was extended to 'tick a box'; and (2) whether there were authentic and meaningful opportunities to contribute (e.g., valued contributions aligned with people's lived experience, skills, and interests) or if they only served as a 'rubber stamp'. Communication and expectations tied the 'tick box' and 'rubber stamp' themes together and underlie whether engagement was authentic and meaningful.

CONCLUSIONS

For research engagement to be authentic and meaningful, researchers and families need to set clear expectations, build rapport, have tangible supports, use clear communication, and build time and space to work together. Future work will explore the utility of the simulations and whether they improve knowledge and attitudes about authentic and meaningful engagement in research.

Development of an adolescent advisory group to inform sexual and reproductive health research for first- and second-generation immigrant adolescents in Canada: A community-based participatory action research study

Background

Despite the growing evidence supporting the benefit of engaging adolescents in research, the active engagement of immigrant adolescents in research is limited. Further, when exploring the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of immigrant adolescents, utilization of adolescent advisory groups is finite. This study aimed to train and evaluate engagement of an adolescent advisory group (AAG) to inform SRH needs of immigrant adolescents in Canada.

Methods

Using purposive sampling, 13 AAG members were recruited into this study. Members were trained in content related to SRH needs of adolescents and various research methodologies such as conducting a scoping review and qualitative interviews with adolescent participants. After 10 months of member engagement, their experiences were evaluated to identify areas of success and areas for improvement. These data were collected using the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, which consisted of a Likert survey and open-ended questions, and analyzed in accordance to the Patient Engagement in Research (PEIR) framework.

Findings

Ten members completed the evaluation survey. Likert survey responses were primarily positive. Majority of members showed positive demonstrations regarding various components of the PEIR framework, including contributions, support, research environment, and feeling valued.

Conclusion

Findings illustrated that immigrant AAGs are constructive to informing SRH research. Not only can research teams benefit, but members are also empowered. This study provided the foundation for future immigrant adolescent engagement in research and knowledge translation, and effective means of evaluating engagement by utilizing the PEIR framework.

Measurable outcomes of consumer engagement in health research: A scoping review

Background

Consumer engagement is increasingly recognized as an instrumental component of health research, with many institutions and international bodies mandating it as part of the research and funding process. Given an increasing utilization of consumer engagement in health research, it is critical to identify the literature which support its value and tools that capture successful outcomes. To develop an overview of the literature, we conducted an umbrella scoping review exploring important outcomes of consumer engagement in health research combined with a scoping review of relevant frameworks. Specifically, we aimed to capture outcomes which reflect authentic and meaningful consumer engagement.

Methods

Four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library) were searched using key search terms. Records were included if they were review articles or frameworks that addressed outcomes of consumer engagement in health research. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and an inductive qualitative content analysis. Identified outcomes were sorted based on the three most relevant stakeholder groups (consumer, researcher, institution).

Results

A total of twenty articles that explored a variety of health disciplines were included. We identified fifteen measurable outcomes of consumer engagement in health research. Eight core outcomes were relevant to all stakeholder groups, and were considered fundamental to authentic consumer engagement including (1) trust, (2) empowerment, (3) respect, (4) confidence in the outcomes of the research, (5) transparency of the research process, (6) satisfaction with the consumer engagement program, (7) knowledge and experiences of consumers, and (8) degree of consumer engagement. Outcomes pertaining to specific stakeholder groups included representativeness and diversity of the consumer groups, research relevance to consumers, funding opportunities, quality/validity of the research, recruitment/retention rates, translation and dissemination of research, and interpretation of results.

Conclusion

This review identified key measurable outcomes that could be captured when evaluating the impacts of consumer engagement on health research and the success of consumer engagement programs. All outcomes identified were relatively underexplored within the literature, and inadequately and/or inconsistently evaluated amongst studies. Future research should consult all stakeholder groups to identify outcomes perceived to be reflective of optimal consumer engagement.

The experience of patient partners in research: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis

CONTEXT

Patient engagement in research consists in involving patients as partners across the research cycle. This practice has quickly become an international standard, with funding bodies actively encouraging it. As the increased incentive to engage patients can lead to tokenistic partnerships, it is important to consider the experiences of patient-partners.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize the qualitative literature on the experience of patients as partners in research.

DESIGN

A systematic review of the literature with thematic synthesis was realized, guided by the framework developed by Thomas and Harden (Bmc Med Res Methodol 8: 45, 2008).

DATA COLLECTION

A search strategy was developed to encompass keywords relating to patient-partners in research, their experience, and the qualitative nature of the target studies. 10 databases were searched using the EBSCO-host engine, along with the Scopus engine to include EMBASE. The search results were screened for the following inclusion criteria: articles written in English; articles reporting on the experience of patient-partners in research; qualitative studies or mixed-methods studies with a distinct qualitative section.

ANALYSIS

Included articles were charted for general information. The CASP qualitative checklist was used for critical appraisal. The "results" section of each article was coded line by line. Codes were aggregated inductively to form descriptive themes and analytical themes, in order to synthesize the ideas found in the selection of articles.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 10,222 results. After the removal of duplicates, 5534 titles and abstracts were screened, 88 full-text reports were evaluated, and 41 studies were included. Articles reporting on these studies were published between 2005 and 2020. Seven themes emerged from the analysis: "motivations to engage in research", "activities in patient engagement", "structure", "competence", "team dynamics", "impacts on broader life", and "illness". Articles reported varying degrees of perceived impact on research and satisfaction concerning the level of engagement. The importance of power differentials and team dynamics were widely stated.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings provide an in-depth view of the experiences of patient-partners in research. Most articles reported a generally positive experience, but challenges and pitfalls of patient engagement were identified. This will serve research teams by highlighting good practices and possible improvements.

Interventions for mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing in long COVID: a systematic review of registered trials

BACKGROUND

Among patients diagnosed with COVID-19, a substantial proportion are experiencing ongoing symptoms for months after infection, known as 'long COVID'. Long COVID is associated with a wide range of physical and neuropsychological symptoms, including impacts on mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing. However, intervention research is only beginning to emerge. This systematic review synthesizes currently registered trials examining interventions for mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing in patients with long COVID.

METHODS

Standard systematic review guidelines were followed. Trials registered in two large trial registries in 2020 to May 2022 were reviewed. Included studies were narratively synthesized by type of intervention and a risk-of-bias assessment was conducted.

RESULTS

Forty-two registered trials were included, with a total target sample size of 5814 participants. These include 11 psychological interventions, five pharmacological and other medical interventions, and five evaluating herbal, nutritional, or natural supplement interventions. An additional nine trials are examining cognitive and neurorehabilitation interventions and 12 are examining physiotherapy or physical rehabilitation. Most trials are randomized, but many are feasibility trials; trials are evaluating a wide spectrum of outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

While there is a newly emerging body of research testing interventions for mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing in long COVID, the breadth and scope of the research remains limited. It is urgently incumbent on researchers to expand upon the intervention research currently under way, in order to generate high-quality evidence on a wide range of candidate interventions for diverse long COVID patient populations.

Engaging with patients in research on knowledge translation/implementation science methods: a self study

BACKGROUND

In 2017, the British Columbia (Canada) SUPPORT (SUpport for People and Patient-Oriented Research) Unit created six methods clusters to advance methodologies in patient and public oriented research (POR). The knowledge translation (KT)/implementation science methods cluster identified that although there was guidance about how to involve patients and public members in POR research generally, little was known about how best to involve patients and public members on teams specifically exploring POR KT/implementation science methodologies. The purpose of this self-study was to explore what it means to engage patients and the public in studies of POR methods through the reflections of members of five KT/implementation science teams.

METHODS

Informed by a collaborative action research approach, this quality improvement self-study focused on reflection within four KT/implementation science research teams in 2020-2021. The self-study included two rounds of individual interviews with 18 members across four teams. Qualitative data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach followed by a structured discussion of preliminary findings with the research teams. Subsequently, through two small group discussion sessions, the patients/public members from the teams refined the findings.

RESULTS

Undertaking research on POR KT/implementation science methodologies typically requires teams to work with the uncertainty of exploratory and processual research approaches, make good matches between patients/public members and the team, work intentionally yet flexibly, and be attuned to the external context and its influences on the team. POR methodological research teams need to consider that patients/public members bring their life experiences and world views to the research project. They become researchers in their own right. Individual and team reflection allows teams to become aware of team needs, acknowledge team members' vulnerabilities, gain greater sensitivity, and enhance communication.

CONCLUSIONS

The iterative self-study process provided research team members with opportunities for reflection and new understanding. Working with patients/public team members as co-researchers opens up new ways of understanding important aspects of research methodologies, which may influence future KT/implementation science research approaches.

A scoping review to identify and describe the characteristics of theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships

BACKGROUND

Engaging users of health research, namely knowledge users, as partners in the research process may to lead to evidence that is more relevant to the users. This may optimize the uptake of evidence in healthcare practice, resulting in improved health outcomes or more efficient healthcare systems. However, barriers to involving knowledge users in the research process exist. Theories, models and frameworks may help guide the process of involving knowledge users and address barriers to engaging with knowledge users in research; however, there is little evidence identifying or describing the theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships.

OBJECTIVES

Identify and describe theories, models and frameworks of health research partnerships. Report on concepts of knowledge user engagement represented in identified theories, models and frameworks.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review. Database (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PCORI) and ancestry and snowball searches were utilized. Included articles were written in English, published between January 2005 and June 2021, specific to health, a research partnership, and referred to a theory, model or framework. No critical appraisal was conducted. We developed a coding framework to extract details related to the publication (e.g. country, year) and theory, model or framework (e.g. intended users, theoretical underpinning, methodology, methods of development, purpose, concepts of knowledge user engagement). One reviewer conducted data extraction. Descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis were utilized to report the results.

RESULTS

We identified 21 874 articles in screening. Thirty-nine models or frameworks were included in data analysis, but no theory. Two models or frameworks (5%) were underpinned by theory. Literature review was the method (n = 11, 28%) most frequently used to develop a model or framework. Guiding or managing a partnership was the most frequently reported purpose of the model/framework (n = 14, 36%). The most represented concept of knowledge user engagement was principles/values (n = 36, 92%).

CONCLUSIONS

The models and frameworks identified could be utilized by researchers and knowledge users to inform aspects of a health research partnership, such as guidance or implementation of a partnership. Future research evaluating the quality and applicability of the models and frameworks is necessary to help partners decide which model or framework to implement.

Including People with Parkinson’s Disease in Clinical Study Design and Execution: A Call to Action

The proactive inclusion of patients in the design and execution of clinical studies has been an emerging focus for decades. Such participatory research helps to design studies better, by addressing relevant research questions and defining outcomes that matter to patients. Yet, much remains to be learned about the best methods and exact impacts of patient engagement in research in general, and more specifically, about the specific challenges that come with Parkinson’s disease. Here we present the lived experiences of patient researchers living with Parkinson’s disease, as a motivation for the value of their perspectives in research and as a call to action for empirical research on how to successfully include patient researchers.

Applicability of a national strategy for patient-oriented research to people who use(d) substances: a Canadian experience

BACKGROUND

Europe and North America are in the grips of a devastating overdose crisis. People who use substances often feel unsafe to access healthcare due to fears of stigma, blame, judgement, poor treatment, or other repercussions. As a result, they often avoid, delay, or leave care, resulting in premature death and missed opportunities for care. Internationally, there have been concerted efforts to move towards patient-engaged research to enhance the quality of health care systems and services. In Canada, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research (SPOR) initiative promotes engagement of patients as active partners in health care research. As part of a community based patient oriented research project, we critically analyze the SPOR framework to provide insights into what constitutes safer research with people who use(d) substances.

METHODS

We undertook a two-stage process that began with a review of community based research principles and the SPOR framework. At the second stage, we undertook a qualitative descriptive study employing focus groups to generate description of the adequacy and appropriateness of the SPOR framework for guiding research with people who use(d) substances on four key dimensions (patient engagement, guiding principles, core areas of engagement and benefits). The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis to identify key issues and insights.

RESULTS

While the SPOR framework includes a range of patient roles, principles and areas for engagement, there are issues and gaps related to essential elements of safe patient-oriented research for people who use substances. These include an individualized focus on patients as partners, lack of recognition of community benefits, power imbalances and distrust due to systemic stigma, engagement as one way capacity building and learning, and lack of accountability for taking action on research findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the extent of stigma in health care and the ongoing illicit drug policy crisis, strategies for enhancing equitable Patient-Oriented Research (POR) include shifting language from patient partners to community researchers, recognizing power inequities and adding trust and equity as core POR principles including pay equity. Employing community based participatory research as a POR methodology allows the lead researchers to fully engage community throughout the research process, enhances community benefits and accountability for action.

Every Story Is Different: Experiences With Body Changes Related to Cancer

One of the important aspects of stakeholder engagement in cancer care and system planning is hearing from individuals who have been diagnosed with cancer about the impact of the diagnosis and treatment on their lives. Hearing stories from the perspectives of cancer survivors offers opportunity to gain new insight and understanding about experiences of being diagnosed and treated for cancer. This article presents ten short narratives about survivors' perspectives on body image and cancer. Each story is unique but, taken together, the picture they create is one of facing challenges, discovering personal resilience, and moving forward to engage in living. The stories emphasize the importance of communication and support from healthcare providers and understanding needs for a person-centered cancer care system.

'It's the empathy'-defining a role for peer support among people living with chronic kidney disease: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Persons with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have unique support needs associated with managing a chronic yet often silent condition, complex treatment-related decisions and care transitions. The aim of this study was to explore perspectives on how peer support could address CKD support needs and augment care.

DESIGN

This study employed a qualitative descriptive methodology. Data were collected through focus groups (cofacilitated by patient partners) and semistructured interviews.

SETTING

Four multidisciplinary CKD clinics across Southern Alberta, Canada.

PARTICIPANTS

We purposively sampled among adult patients with advanced, non-dialysis CKD and their caregivers, as well as trained peer mentors from The Kidney Foundation of Canada's Kidney Connect programme.

ANALYSIS

Transcripts were coded in duplicate, and themes were generated inductively through a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

We conducted seven focus groups with a total of 39 patient and caregiver participants. Seven patients and caregivers who were unable to attend a focus group and 13 peer mentors participated in a telephone interview. Although patients and caregivers had limited awareness of peer support, participants acknowledged its central role in affirming their experiences and enabling confidence to live well with kidney disease. We identified four themes related to the anticipated role of peer support in addressing support needs for people with non-dialysis CKD: (1) creating connection; (2) preparing for uncertainty; (3) adapting to new realities; and (4) responsive peer support delivery. Aligning peer support access with patient readiness and existing CKD management supports can promote optimism, community and pragmatic adaptations to challenges.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients, caregivers and peer mentors highlighted a unique value in the shared experiences of CKD peers to anticipate and manage disease-related challenges and confidently face a future living with kidney disease.