The engagement of people with lived experiences in substance use research.

IF 3.4 3区医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Frontiers in Public Health Pub Date : 2025-10-01 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2025.1611836

Catherine Kim

{"title":"The engagement of people with lived experiences in substance use research.","authors":"Catherine Kim","doi":"10.3389/fpubh.2025.1611836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: People with lived experiences (PWLE) are underrepresented in research engagement, however their involvement can significantly boost the relevance and impact of research. Questions concerning the credibility and trustworthiness of PWLE researchers by traditional and positivist researchers have been identified. Having been associated with substance use of questionable legality and related substance use activities, PWLE researchers face stigma and are deemed to lack the trustworthiness that serious research entails. Current literature on PWLE found a dearth of knowledge on the definitions and conceptualizations of PWLE in research, which this paper attempts to partially address.Methods: Issues surrounding the trustworthiness of PWLE in substance use research were investigated, along with accounts of involving PWLE at different phases of the research process.Findings: People with lived experiences have been undervalued as researchers compared to other positivist counterparts despite advocating against marginalization and oppressive practices. They offer in-depth, meaningful contributions to research involving phenomena that they have experienced and were found to provide insights that other non-PWLE researchers overlooked. Moreover, engaging PWLE in research is not only beneficial for research processes and outcomes but is also empowering for PWLE themselves.Conclusion: A guide to maintaining trustworthiness and a description of PWLE contributions to research processes are provided.","PeriodicalId":12548,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Public Health","volume":"13 ","pages":"1611836"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12521110/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1611836","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People with lived experiences (PWLE) are underrepresented in research engagement, however their involvement can significantly boost the relevance and impact of research. Questions concerning the credibility and trustworthiness of PWLE researchers by traditional and positivist researchers have been identified. Having been associated with substance use of questionable legality and related substance use activities, PWLE researchers face stigma and are deemed to lack the trustworthiness that serious research entails. Current literature on PWLE found a dearth of knowledge on the definitions and conceptualizations of PWLE in research, which this paper attempts to partially address.

Methods: Issues surrounding the trustworthiness of PWLE in substance use research were investigated, along with accounts of involving PWLE at different phases of the research process.

Findings: People with lived experiences have been undervalued as researchers compared to other positivist counterparts despite advocating against marginalization and oppressive practices. They offer in-depth, meaningful contributions to research involving phenomena that they have experienced and were found to provide insights that other non-PWLE researchers overlooked. Moreover, engaging PWLE in research is not only beneficial for research processes and outcomes but is also empowering for PWLE themselves.

Conclusion: A guide to maintaining trustworthiness and a description of PWLE contributions to research processes are provided.

查看原文本刊更多论文

有亲身经历的人参与药物使用研究。

背景：有生活经历的人（PWLE）在研究参与中的代表性不足，但他们的参与可以显著提高研究的相关性和影响。传统研究人员和实证研究人员对PWLE研究人员的可信度和可信赖性提出了质疑。由于与合法性可疑的物质使用和相关的物质使用活动有关，PWLE研究人员面临耻辱，并被认为缺乏严肃研究所需的可信度。目前关于PWLE的文献发现，研究中对PWLE的定义和概念缺乏了解，本文试图部分解决这一问题。方法：围绕物质使用研究中PWLE的可信度问题进行调查，以及在研究过程的不同阶段涉及PWLE的说明。研究结果：与其他实证主义者相比，有生活经历的人被低估了，尽管他们主张反对边缘化和压迫性的做法。他们为涉及他们所经历的现象的研究提供了深入而有意义的贡献，并被发现提供了其他非pwle研究人员所忽视的见解。此外，让PWLE参与研究不仅有利于研究过程和结果，而且也有利于PWLE本身。结论：提供了维护可信度的指南和PWLE对研究过程的贡献的描述。

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

Frontiers in Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

7.70%

发文量

4469

审稿时长

14 weeks

期刊介绍： Frontiers in Public Health is a multidisciplinary open-access journal which publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research and is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians, policy makers and the public worldwide. The journal aims at overcoming current fragmentation in research and publication, promoting consistency in pursuing relevant scientific themes, and supporting finding dissemination and translation into practice. Frontiers in Public Health is organized into Specialty Sections that cover different areas of research in the field. Please refer to the author guidelines for details on article types and the submission process.