Iman Elfeddali , Willem Johan Kop , Margot Metz , Linh Nguyen , Jennifer Sweetman , Jonathan Gower , Christina M. van der Feltz-Cornelis , Arjan C. Videler
{"title":"根据詹姆斯-林德联盟确定优先事项的合作方法,荷兰患者、护理人员和医疗保健专业人员就医学上无法解释的症状提出的研究优先事项","authors":"Iman Elfeddali , Willem Johan Kop , Margot Metz , Linh Nguyen , Jennifer Sweetman , Jonathan Gower , Christina M. van der Feltz-Cornelis , Arjan C. Videler","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Experiencing physical symptoms that are medically not yet explained (MNYES) is associated with considerable burden in daily life. Research priorities in this area have been primarily investigator-driven. The present study identifies the top 10 research priorities, incorporating the views of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study used the Priority Setting Partnership approach in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance (JLA). The priority setting approach combines survey-based data from patients with a specific disorder/condition and relevant stakeholders (i.e., caregivers and healthcare professionals) with input from group meetings and a final priority setting consensus meeting. There were three consecutive phases: (1) online survey with an open-ended question to collect topics for future scientific research (<em>N</em> = 345 participants); (2) an online survey among stakeholders to prioritise the research questions generated in Phase 1 (<em>N</em> = 400); and (3) a final multi-stakeholder consensus meeting, held over two half-days to determine the final top 10 research priorities for the Netherlands (day 1 <em>N</em> = 25, day 2 <em>N</em> = 24).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Phase 1 resulted in 572 topics, which were reduced to 37 summary research questions. Phase 2 resulted in 18 research priorities, that were ranked and the top 10 priorities were established during the final consensus meeting. The top 10 research priorities included three main themes: optimising efficient diagnosis and treatment, aetiology and prevention, and coping with MNYES.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The top 10 priorities provide insight into what is most important for future research into MNYES from the perspective of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50074,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychosomatic Research","volume":"186 ","pages":"Article 111890"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Research priorities for medically not yet explained symptoms expressed by patients, carers, and healthcare professionals in the Netherlands following the James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership approach\",\"authors\":\"Iman Elfeddali , Willem Johan Kop , Margot Metz , Linh Nguyen , Jennifer Sweetman , Jonathan Gower , Christina M. van der Feltz-Cornelis , Arjan C. Videler\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpsychores.2024.111890\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Experiencing physical symptoms that are medically not yet explained (MNYES) is associated with considerable burden in daily life. Research priorities in this area have been primarily investigator-driven. The present study identifies the top 10 research priorities, incorporating the views of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study used the Priority Setting Partnership approach in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance (JLA). The priority setting approach combines survey-based data from patients with a specific disorder/condition and relevant stakeholders (i.e., caregivers and healthcare professionals) with input from group meetings and a final priority setting consensus meeting. There were three consecutive phases: (1) online survey with an open-ended question to collect topics for future scientific research (<em>N</em> = 345 participants); (2) an online survey among stakeholders to prioritise the research questions generated in Phase 1 (<em>N</em> = 400); and (3) a final multi-stakeholder consensus meeting, held over two half-days to determine the final top 10 research priorities for the Netherlands (day 1 <em>N</em> = 25, day 2 <em>N</em> = 24).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Phase 1 resulted in 572 topics, which were reduced to 37 summary research questions. Phase 2 resulted in 18 research priorities, that were ranked and the top 10 priorities were established during the final consensus meeting. The top 10 research priorities included three main themes: optimising efficient diagnosis and treatment, aetiology and prevention, and coping with MNYES.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The top 10 priorities provide insight into what is most important for future research into MNYES from the perspective of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychosomatic Research\",\"volume\":\"186 \",\"pages\":\"Article 111890\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychosomatic Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399924003027\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychosomatic Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022399924003027","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Research priorities for medically not yet explained symptoms expressed by patients, carers, and healthcare professionals in the Netherlands following the James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership approach
Objective
Experiencing physical symptoms that are medically not yet explained (MNYES) is associated with considerable burden in daily life. Research priorities in this area have been primarily investigator-driven. The present study identifies the top 10 research priorities, incorporating the views of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.
Methods
This study used the Priority Setting Partnership approach in collaboration with the James Lind Alliance (JLA). The priority setting approach combines survey-based data from patients with a specific disorder/condition and relevant stakeholders (i.e., caregivers and healthcare professionals) with input from group meetings and a final priority setting consensus meeting. There were three consecutive phases: (1) online survey with an open-ended question to collect topics for future scientific research (N = 345 participants); (2) an online survey among stakeholders to prioritise the research questions generated in Phase 1 (N = 400); and (3) a final multi-stakeholder consensus meeting, held over two half-days to determine the final top 10 research priorities for the Netherlands (day 1 N = 25, day 2 N = 24).
Results
Phase 1 resulted in 572 topics, which were reduced to 37 summary research questions. Phase 2 resulted in 18 research priorities, that were ranked and the top 10 priorities were established during the final consensus meeting. The top 10 research priorities included three main themes: optimising efficient diagnosis and treatment, aetiology and prevention, and coping with MNYES.
Conclusion
The top 10 priorities provide insight into what is most important for future research into MNYES from the perspective of patients, carers and healthcare professionals.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Psychosomatic Research is a multidisciplinary research journal covering all aspects of the relationships between psychology and medicine. The scope is broad and ranges from basic human biological and psychological research to evaluations of treatment and services. Papers will normally be concerned with illness or patients rather than studies of healthy populations. Studies concerning special populations, such as the elderly and children and adolescents, are welcome. In addition to peer-reviewed original papers, the journal publishes editorials, reviews, and other papers related to the journal''s aims.