43
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The research priorities of patients attending UK cancer treatment centres: findings from a modified nominal group study

      other

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Members of the public are increasingly consulted over health care and research priorities. Patient involvement in determining cancer research priorities, however, has remained underdeveloped. This paper presents the findings of the first consultation to be conducted with UK cancer patients concerning research priorities. The study adopted a participatory approach using a collaborative model that sought joint ownership of the study with people affected by cancer. An exploratory, qualitative approach was used. Consultation groups were the main method, combining focus group and nominal group techniques. Seventeen groups were held with a total of 105 patients broadly representative of the UK cancer population. Fifteen areas for research were identified. Top priority areas included the impact cancer has on life, how to live with cancer and related support issues; risk factors and causes of cancer; early detection and prevention. Although biological and treatment related aspects of science were identified as important, patients rated the management of practical, social and emotional issues as a higher priority. There is a mismatch between the research priorities identified by participants and the current UK research portfolio. Current research activity should be broadened to reflect the priorities of people affected by the disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Relation between agendas of the research community and the research consumer.

          Previous studies have suggested that research agendas can be biased. To determine whether there is a mismatch between available research evidence and the research preferences of consumers we examined research on interventions for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joint. We searched published and unpublished studies on interventions in this condition to assess the structure of the evidence base. Focus groups and a postal survey of research consumers were then undertaken to examine their views and research priorities. Review of published and unpublished reports showed that the evidence base was dominated by studies of pharmaceutical (550, 59%) and surgical (238, 26%) interventions. 24 (36%) of 67 survey respondents ranked knee replacement as the highest priority for research, whereas 14 (21%) chose education and advice as their first choice. There is a mismatch between the amount of published work on different interventions, and the degree of interest of consumers. We suggest that broadening of the research agenda would be more in line with current treatment patterns and consumer views. If this mismatch is not addressed, then evidence-based medicine will not be representative of consumer needs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge.

            S. Epstein (1996)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              What does it mean to involve consumers successfully in NHS research? A consensus study.

              To obtain consensus on the principles and indicators of successful consumer involvement in NHS research. Consensus methods were used. An expert workshop, employing the nominal group technique was used to generate potential principles and indicators. A two-round postal Delphi process was used to obtain consensus on the principles and indicators. Participants were drawn from health, social care, universities and consumer organizations. A purposive sampling strategy was used to identify people who had experience and/or knowledge of consumer involvement in NHS research. Six researchers and seven consumers participated in an expert workshop. Ninety-six people completed both rounds of the Delphi process. Consensus on principles and indicators of successful consumer involvement in NHS research. Eight principles were developed through an expert workshop and Delphi process, and rated as both clear and valid. Consensus was reached on at least one clear and valid indicator by which to measure each principle. Consensus has been obtained on eight principles of successful consumer involvement in NHS research. They may help commissioners, researchers and consumers to deepen their understanding of this issue, and can be used to guide good practice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Cancer
                British Journal of Cancer
                Nature Publishing Group
                0007-0920
                1532-1827
                06 March 2007
                20 March 2007
                26 March 2007
                : 96
                : 6
                : 875-881
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
                [2 ]Macmillan Research Unit, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
                [3 ]Division of Social Statistics, School of Social Sciences and Southampton Statistical Sciences Research Institute, University of Southampton Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Author for correspondence:
                Article
                6603662
                10.1038/sj.bjc.6603662
                2360101
                17342090
                66ebf36e-6168-42af-aeab-895803efb6b9
                Copyright 2007, Cancer Research UK
                History
                : 21 November 2006
                : 29 January 2007
                : 29 January 2007
                Categories
                Clinical Studies

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                participatory,consultation,priorities,service users,cancer research agenda
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                participatory, consultation, priorities, service users, cancer research agenda

                Comments

                Comment on this article