我在一项随机对照试验中作为精神卫生服务使用者共同申请人的角色思考

L. Lea, S. Byford, Yve Coney, R. Crane, Natalia Fagabemi, Tony Gurney, H. Leigh-Phippard, C. Rosten, K. Simms, C. Strauss
{"title":"我在一项随机对照试验中作为精神卫生服务使用者共同申请人的角色思考","authors":"L. Lea, S. Byford, Yve Coney, R. Crane, Natalia Fagabemi, Tony Gurney, H. Leigh-Phippard, C. Rosten, K. Simms, C. Strauss","doi":"10.18546/rfa.04.1.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This is not a research paper but a personal and collective reflection of patient and public involvement (PPI) for the LIGHTMind 2 randomized control trial (www. isrctn. com/ISRCTN13495752). This trial compares two guided self-help psychological interventions for depression, and is delivered\n in the UK NHS Improving Access to Psychological Therapy services. The paper is the result of my reviewing our PPI 18 months into the trial. The PPI includes myself as a research team member and co-applicant, with lived experience of depression, mindfulness and cognitive behaviour therapy.\n There is a Lived Experience Advisory Panel of six people with lived experience of depression or mindfulness, who advise the researchers. Two people with lived experience of mental health difficulties and knowledge of PPI attend the Trial Steering Committee. This paper includes comments from\n some of the other people with lived experience and from researchers involved in the trial, included as co-authors. I offer the Johari window (Luft, 1970) and the 4Pi National Involvement Standards (NSUN, 2018) as a way of positioning the value of PPI. Developing relationships within PPI is\n identified as a way of moderating the fear that some people experience as they work with researchers. I describe the importance of principles that incorporate explicit statements about the value of PPI.","PeriodicalId":165758,"journal":{"name":"Research for All","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reflections on my role as a mental health service user co-applicant in a randomized control trial\",\"authors\":\"L. Lea, S. Byford, Yve Coney, R. Crane, Natalia Fagabemi, Tony Gurney, H. Leigh-Phippard, C. Rosten, K. Simms, C. Strauss\",\"doi\":\"10.18546/rfa.04.1.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This is not a research paper but a personal and collective reflection of patient and public involvement (PPI) for the LIGHTMind 2 randomized control trial (www. isrctn. com/ISRCTN13495752). This trial compares two guided self-help psychological interventions for depression, and is delivered\\n in the UK NHS Improving Access to Psychological Therapy services. The paper is the result of my reviewing our PPI 18 months into the trial. The PPI includes myself as a research team member and co-applicant, with lived experience of depression, mindfulness and cognitive behaviour therapy.\\n There is a Lived Experience Advisory Panel of six people with lived experience of depression or mindfulness, who advise the researchers. Two people with lived experience of mental health difficulties and knowledge of PPI attend the Trial Steering Committee. This paper includes comments from\\n some of the other people with lived experience and from researchers involved in the trial, included as co-authors. I offer the Johari window (Luft, 1970) and the 4Pi National Involvement Standards (NSUN, 2018) as a way of positioning the value of PPI. Developing relationships within PPI is\\n identified as a way of moderating the fear that some people experience as they work with researchers. I describe the importance of principles that incorporate explicit statements about the value of PPI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":165758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research for All\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research for All\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18546/rfa.04.1.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research for All","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18546/rfa.04.1.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

这不是一篇研究论文,而是对LIGHTMind 2随机对照试验患者和公众参与(PPI)的个人和集体反映。isrctn。com/ISRCTN13495752)。该试验比较了两种针对抑郁症的指导自助心理干预措施,并在英国国民保健服务体系改善心理治疗服务中提供。这篇论文是我在试验18个月后回顾我们的PPI的结果。PPI包括我作为研究团队成员和共同申请人,具有抑郁症,正念和认知行为治疗的生活经验。有一个由六名有过抑郁或正念经历的人组成的生活经验咨询小组,他们为研究人员提供建议。两名有精神健康困难生活经验和PPI知识的人参加了试验指导委员会。这篇论文包括了其他一些有生活经验的人的评论,以及作为共同作者参与试验的研究人员的评论。我提供了Johari窗口(Luft, 1970)和4Pi国家参与标准(NSUN, 2018)作为定位PPI价值的一种方式。在PPI内部发展关系被认为是缓解一些人在与研究人员合作时所经历的恐惧的一种方式。我描述了包含关于PPI价值的明确声明的原则的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reflections on my role as a mental health service user co-applicant in a randomized control trial
This is not a research paper but a personal and collective reflection of patient and public involvement (PPI) for the LIGHTMind 2 randomized control trial (www. isrctn. com/ISRCTN13495752). This trial compares two guided self-help psychological interventions for depression, and is delivered in the UK NHS Improving Access to Psychological Therapy services. The paper is the result of my reviewing our PPI 18 months into the trial. The PPI includes myself as a research team member and co-applicant, with lived experience of depression, mindfulness and cognitive behaviour therapy. There is a Lived Experience Advisory Panel of six people with lived experience of depression or mindfulness, who advise the researchers. Two people with lived experience of mental health difficulties and knowledge of PPI attend the Trial Steering Committee. This paper includes comments from some of the other people with lived experience and from researchers involved in the trial, included as co-authors. I offer the Johari window (Luft, 1970) and the 4Pi National Involvement Standards (NSUN, 2018) as a way of positioning the value of PPI. Developing relationships within PPI is identified as a way of moderating the fear that some people experience as they work with researchers. I describe the importance of principles that incorporate explicit statements about the value of PPI.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信