How best to engage patients, doctors, and other stakeholders in designing comparative effectiveness studies
- PMID: 20921483
- DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0675
How best to engage patients, doctors, and other stakeholders in designing comparative effectiveness studies
Abstract
Having patients, doctors, health plan managers, hospital executives, and other stakeholders participate in the design of comparative effectiveness studies can ensure that this vital research focuses on the evidence gaps most relevant to health care decision makers. Through a qualitative assessment of case studies, we identify five key principles for the effective engagement of a broad coalition of participants in research intended to improve health care and control costs. Those principles are to ensure balance among the participating stakeholders; get participants to "buy in" to the process and understand their roles; provide neutral and expert facilitators for research discussions; establish connections among the participants; and keep the participants engaged throughout the research process.
Similar articles
-
Adding the patient perspective to comparative effectiveness research.Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 Oct;29(10):1863-71. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0660. Health Aff (Millwood). 2010. PMID: 20921487
-
An integrated evidence rating to frame comparative effectiveness assessments for decision makers.Med Care. 2010 Jun;48(6 Suppl):S145-52. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d9913b. Med Care. 2010. PMID: 20473206
-
Observational methods in comparative effectiveness research.Am J Med. 2010 Dec;123(12 Suppl 1):e16-23. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.10.004. Am J Med. 2010. PMID: 21184862 Review.
-
Patients and clinicians as stakeholders in comparative effectiveness research: multiple perspectives and evolving roles.J Comp Eff Res. 2014 Nov;3(6):573-5. doi: 10.2217/cer.14.61. J Comp Eff Res. 2014. PMID: 25494562 No abstract available.
-
Patients, doctors, and videotape: a prescription for creating optimal healing environments?J Altern Complement Med. 2005;11 Suppl 1:S31-9. doi: 10.1089/acm.2005.11.s-31. J Altern Complement Med. 2005. PMID: 16332185 Review.
Cited by
-
Document-Engineering Methodology in Health Care: An Innovative Behavioral Science-Based Approach to Improve Patient Empowerment.JMIR Hum Factors. 2020 Sep 28;7(3):e19196. doi: 10.2196/19196. JMIR Hum Factors. 2020. PMID: 32986001 Free PMC article.
-
Conceptual and practical foundations of patient engagement in research at the patient-centered outcomes research institute.Qual Life Res. 2015 May;24(5):1033-41. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0893-3. Epub 2015 Jan 6. Qual Life Res. 2015. PMID: 25560774 Free PMC article.
-
Patients with stage IV colorectal carcinoma selected for palliative primary tumor resection and systemic therapy survive longer compared with systemic therapy alone: a retrospective comparative cohort study.Int J Surg. 2024 Oct 1;110(10):6493-6500. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000001838. Int J Surg. 2024. PMID: 38935125 Free PMC article.
-
Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement.J Comp Eff Res. 2012 Mar;1(2):181-194. doi: 10.2217/cer.12.7. J Comp Eff Res. 2012. PMID: 22707880 Free PMC article.
-
Family Perspectives on High-Quality Pediatric Subspecialty Referrals.Acad Pediatr. 2016 Aug;16(6):594-600. doi: 10.1016/j.acap.2016.05.147. Epub 2016 May 27. Acad Pediatr. 2016. PMID: 27237115 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources