共同设计及其后果:在IMI-PARADIGM项目中开发共享的患者参与框架

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Callum J Gunn, Sevgi E Fruytier, Teresa Finlay, Lidewij Eva Vat, Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar
{"title":"共同设计及其后果:在IMI-PARADIGM项目中开发共享的患者参与框架","authors":"Callum J Gunn, Sevgi E Fruytier, Teresa Finlay, Lidewij Eva Vat, Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Whilst patient engagement (PE) activities have become increasingly prevalent in development of medicines, collaborating actors have different perspectives on the goals of PE and its added value. In the production of PE standards and frameworks, the significance of these differences tends to be minimised. Boundary objects have been shown to mediate knowledge exchange between multiple social worlds, thereby playing an important role in participatory technology governance processes. In this article, we draw on boundary objects to learn from the process of co-designing a PE monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework within the Innovative Medicines Initiative–Patients Active in Research and Dialogues for an Improved Generation of Medicines (IMI-PARADIGM) consortium (2018–20). As facilitators of PARADIGM’s co-design process, we report on the challenges encountered in developing a practicable M&E framework that serves a variety of needs and interests. We argue these challenges of co-design reflect a negotiation of different frames throughout, thereby providing insight into how such work may contribute to addressing the challenge of knowledge integration in institutional medicines development settings.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":"187 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Co-design and its consequences: developing a shared patient engagement framework in the IMI-PARADIGM project\",\"authors\":\"Callum J Gunn, Sevgi E Fruytier, Teresa Finlay, Lidewij Eva Vat, Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/scipol/scad040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Whilst patient engagement (PE) activities have become increasingly prevalent in development of medicines, collaborating actors have different perspectives on the goals of PE and its added value. In the production of PE standards and frameworks, the significance of these differences tends to be minimised. Boundary objects have been shown to mediate knowledge exchange between multiple social worlds, thereby playing an important role in participatory technology governance processes. In this article, we draw on boundary objects to learn from the process of co-designing a PE monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework within the Innovative Medicines Initiative–Patients Active in Research and Dialogues for an Improved Generation of Medicines (IMI-PARADIGM) consortium (2018–20). As facilitators of PARADIGM’s co-design process, we report on the challenges encountered in developing a practicable M&E framework that serves a variety of needs and interests. We argue these challenges of co-design reflect a negotiation of different frames throughout, thereby providing insight into how such work may contribute to addressing the challenge of knowledge integration in institutional medicines development settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"187 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad040\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad040","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然患者参与(PE)活动在药物开发中变得越来越普遍,但合作参与者对PE的目标及其附加价值有不同的看法。在PE标准和框架的制定过程中,这些差异的重要性往往被最小化。边界对象已被证明可以调解多个社会世界之间的知识交换,从而在参与式技术治理过程中发挥重要作用。在本文中,我们利用边界对象,从创新药物倡议-积极参与研究和对话的患者(IMI-PARADIGM)联盟(2018-20)中共同设计PE监测和评估(M&E)框架的过程中学习。作为PARADIGM的协同设计过程的推动者,我们报告了在开发一个服务于各种需求和利益的可行的M&E框架时遇到的挑战。我们认为,这些共同设计的挑战反映了对不同框架的协商,从而提供了对此类工作如何有助于解决机构药物开发环境中知识整合挑战的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Co-design and its consequences: developing a shared patient engagement framework in the IMI-PARADIGM project
Abstract Whilst patient engagement (PE) activities have become increasingly prevalent in development of medicines, collaborating actors have different perspectives on the goals of PE and its added value. In the production of PE standards and frameworks, the significance of these differences tends to be minimised. Boundary objects have been shown to mediate knowledge exchange between multiple social worlds, thereby playing an important role in participatory technology governance processes. In this article, we draw on boundary objects to learn from the process of co-designing a PE monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework within the Innovative Medicines Initiative–Patients Active in Research and Dialogues for an Improved Generation of Medicines (IMI-PARADIGM) consortium (2018–20). As facilitators of PARADIGM’s co-design process, we report on the challenges encountered in developing a practicable M&E framework that serves a variety of needs and interests. We argue these challenges of co-design reflect a negotiation of different frames throughout, thereby providing insight into how such work may contribute to addressing the challenge of knowledge integration in institutional medicines development settings.
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Science and Public Policy is a leading refereed, international journal on public policies for science, technology and innovation, and on their implications for other public policies. It covers basic, applied, high, low, and any other types of S&T, and rich or poorer countries. It is read in around 70 countries, in universities (teaching and research), government ministries and agencies, consultancies, industry and elsewhere.
×
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