Patient and Public Involvement in Developing and Testing Mental Health-care Interventions: Strategies and Reflections from Three Research Programs

Domenico Giacco, Agnes Chevalier, Philip Mcnamee, Nick Barber, Kamran Shafiq, Imogen Wells
{"title":"Patient and Public Involvement in Developing and Testing Mental Health-care Interventions: Strategies and Reflections from Three Research Programs","authors":"Domenico Giacco, Agnes Chevalier, Philip Mcnamee, Nick Barber, Kamran Shafiq, Imogen Wells","doi":"10.4103/wsp.wsp_13_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patient and public involvement (PPI) is valued and widely practiced in mental health research but in different ways. We present three research programs, aiming to develop and test mental healthcare interventions and we discuss their PPI strategies and activities. In all these programs, PPI has been sought from their initial conception and design and has helped their management, intervention development processes, quantitative and qualitative evaluations, and in the assessment of PPI activities themselves. The programs focus on different groups (patients with chronic depression, patients with psychotic disorders, and carers) and develop different interventions. Comparing these programs offers the opportunity to appreciate different models of involvement. These, for example, range from training lived experience collaborators to analyze qualitative data directly to asking them to comment on findings; from involving lived experience collaborators in the design of new interventions to involving them in intervention adaptation to a particular group or circumstance; and from carrying out formal PPI evaluations to collecting informal feedback during meetings. Even in the diversity of programs and PPI activities presented, common themes could be identified in relation to: specifying (and ideally co-designing) expectations and role of contributors; making bureaucratic procedures as user-friendly as possible; appropriately choosing or blending online and offline meetings; and designing flexible and inclusive arrangements to maximize participation. Our experiences contribute to a growing evidence base that can help researchers to develop meaningful, enjoyable, and constructive collaborations with people with lived experience. These collaborations will keep clinical mental health research relevant, impactful, and tailored to patients' needs.","PeriodicalId":285109,"journal":{"name":"World Social Psychiatry","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Social Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/wsp.wsp_13_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is valued and widely practiced in mental health research but in different ways. We present three research programs, aiming to develop and test mental healthcare interventions and we discuss their PPI strategies and activities. In all these programs, PPI has been sought from their initial conception and design and has helped their management, intervention development processes, quantitative and qualitative evaluations, and in the assessment of PPI activities themselves. The programs focus on different groups (patients with chronic depression, patients with psychotic disorders, and carers) and develop different interventions. Comparing these programs offers the opportunity to appreciate different models of involvement. These, for example, range from training lived experience collaborators to analyze qualitative data directly to asking them to comment on findings; from involving lived experience collaborators in the design of new interventions to involving them in intervention adaptation to a particular group or circumstance; and from carrying out formal PPI evaluations to collecting informal feedback during meetings. Even in the diversity of programs and PPI activities presented, common themes could be identified in relation to: specifying (and ideally co-designing) expectations and role of contributors; making bureaucratic procedures as user-friendly as possible; appropriately choosing or blending online and offline meetings; and designing flexible and inclusive arrangements to maximize participation. Our experiences contribute to a growing evidence base that can help researchers to develop meaningful, enjoyable, and constructive collaborations with people with lived experience. These collaborations will keep clinical mental health research relevant, impactful, and tailored to patients' needs.
患者和公众参与发展和测试精神卫生保健干预措施:从三个研究项目的策略和反思
患者和公众参与(PPI)在精神卫生研究中得到重视和广泛实践,但方式不同。我们提出了三个研究项目,旨在开发和测试心理健康干预措施,并讨论了他们的PPI策略和活动。在所有这些项目中,从他们最初的概念和设计中寻求PPI,并帮助他们的管理,干预开发过程,定量和定性评估以及PPI活动本身的评估。这些项目针对不同的群体(慢性抑郁症患者、精神病患者和护理人员),并制定不同的干预措施。比较这些项目提供了欣赏不同参与模式的机会。例如,这些方法包括培训生活经验合作者直接分析定性数据,要求他们对发现发表评论;从让生活经验合作者参与新干预措施的设计到让他们参与对特定群体或环境的干预适应;从进行正式的个人绩效评估到在会议期间收集非正式的反馈。即使在项目和PPI活动的多样性中,也可以确定与以下相关的共同主题:指定(理想情况下共同设计)贡献者的期望和角色;使官僚程序尽可能方便使用;适当选择或融合线上和线下会议;并设计灵活和包容的安排,以最大限度地参与。我们的经验有助于建立一个不断增长的证据基础,可以帮助研究人员与有生活经验的人建立有意义的、愉快的和建设性的合作。这些合作将保持临床精神卫生研究的相关性、影响力,并根据患者的需求量身定制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信