Mobilising the experiential knowledge of clinicians, patients and carers for applied health-care research
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13041372 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Pam Carter (0000-0001-7281-1468, University of Leicester), Roger Beech (Keele University), Domenica Coxon (University of Edinburgh), Martin J Thomas (0000-0002-4951-9925, Versus Arthritis), Clare Jinks (0000-0002-3407-2446, Versus Arthritis, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 307-320 |
| Publication date | 2013-03-12 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Contemporary Social Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2158-2041 • E-ISSN: 2158-205X |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/21582041.2013.767468 |
| OpenAlex | W2131598656 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 41 |
This article demonstrates the benefits of combining various types of knowledge for applied health research. Funding is available for health research despite these being ‘austere times’ for public services and international policy shifts recognise the role that patients, carers and the public can play in research. In England the National Institute for Health Research, Research Design Service (RDS) was created to ensure that the experiential knowledge of clinicians working in the National Health Service is informed by methodological expertise to achieve relevant research outcomes. The RDS also facilitates patient and public involvement in research, framed as ‘PPI’. This raises the question of how PPI impacts on research design and funding and which patients or members of the public should be involved in which aspects of research. To answer these questions we present case studies that draw on the expertise of academics, clinicians, patients and the public in applied health research. These cases demonstrate that where patients with direct experience of the condition that is to be studied are actively involved as advisers early on in applied health research, this can enhance the likelihood of successful funding applications, ethical aspects of research and the relevance of questionnaires and interventions to patients. For comparative purposes, we give an example of an unsuccessful research proposal. We contribute to theoretical development through refining the conceptualisation of PPI by unpicking the different roles that members of the public play as lay people, distinguishing this from the specific expertise that comes from direct experience of being a service user, carer or patient. We conclude that different types of knowledge are required for applied health research: methodological expertise, practice-based expertise, and the experiential expertise of patients or carers. While there are no guarantees, the scrutiny function performed by lay involvement in research funding panels can challenge the balance of power
Business · Experiential knowledge · Experiential learning · Health care · Medical education · Pedagogy · Political science · Psychological intervention · Public health · Public relations · Relevance (law · Service (business · Empathy and Medical Education · Medicine · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Mental Health and Psychiatry · Nursing · Psychology
Supporting public involvement in research design and grant development
Toward Co-productive Learning? The Exchange Network as Experimental Space
In whose pockets? How small Danish patient organisations balance legitimacy, representation and dependency in collaboration with public sector medical researchers and the life science industry
Doing' hypertension
It takes two to tango
Inclusion
The snakes and ladders of user involvement
Risk Factors for Falls among Elderly Persons Living in the Community
The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)
Discourse and social change
Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research
The impact of patient and public involvement in the work of the Dementias & Neurodegenerative Diseases Research Network (DeNDRoN)
Critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in research
User involvement in the development of a research bid
Knowledge mobilisation and the civic academy
Advocates, Agnostics and Adversaries
Making ‘what works’ work
Conceptual, Theoretical and Practical Issues in Measuring the Benefits of Public Participation
Healthcare professionals' representations of ‘patient and public involvement’ and creation of ‘public participant’ identities
The Expert Patients Programme
Testing Survey Questions
Shifting Subject Positions
Commentary and Issues
Keeping Service User Involvement in Research Honest
What's in a Name
Discourse in different voices
Theoretical directions for an emancipatory concept of patient and public involvement
Qualitative research and deliberative methods
Critical perspectives on 'consumer involvement' in health research
| Citations per year | 0.38 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2013 - 2024 (12) |
| Highly cited | No |