用户参与的公共准则与自由研究的理想之间:使用协作式自述来探索研究人员在用户参与过程中的经验。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Anne Werner, Ingrid Ruud Knutsen, Anne-Kari Johannessen
{"title":"用户参与的公共准则与自由研究的理想之间:使用协作式自述来探索研究人员在用户参与过程中的经验。","authors":"Anne Werner,&nbsp;Ingrid Ruud Knutsen,&nbsp;Anne-Kari Johannessen","doi":"10.1111/hex.70055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background and Aim</h3>\n \n <p>User participation is a prerequisite for receiving research funding in healthcare in Norway. Despite many positive benefits, studies report challenges from users' and researchers' perspectives. Limited knowledge exists concerning researchers' experiences in scenarios where the users are professionals within healthcare and research. The aim of this retrospective study was to explore and reflect on personal experiences as researchers from a process of planning and developing research questions for a PhD project, following the James Lind Alliance guidelines, which were a requirement for funding. We focused on how the process of collaboration with a specific group of users influenced the researchers' sense of selves.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design and Method</h3>\n \n <p>We used a qualitative design based on collaborative autoethnography, exploring personal experiences from a sociocultural point of view. Two of the three researchers in the team recollected their experiences from the user involvement process while applying the James Lind Alliance guidelines. We used different data sources to develop two autoethnographic narratives. The narratives were analysed using thematic analysis.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The autoethnographic narratives demonstrate the complexity of user involvement from the researchers' perspectives. We identified four themes in the analysis: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, competing paradigms, hierarchy and dual roles. The accounts illustrated the researchers' ambivalence within the process, indicating that they feared a loss of control over the direction of the research project. The narratives visualised a struggle to appear as credible researchers, illustrating how the involvement of a specific group of users and adherence to a specific guideline for user involvement influenced the researchers' experiences of their roles and identities in the collaboration.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>The results point to the relevance of the sociocultural backdrop; researchers might become frontline providers of policy implementation in research, balancing tensions between regulatory constraints, user involvement and researchers' professional identity and research ideals, when a specific, detailed procedure for user involvement is required.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>Two user panels comprising participants from clinical practice, education and research, along with a service user, collaborated in the planning and development of research questions for a PhD project. This autoethnographic study elaborates this process.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"27 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11462430/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between Public Guidelines for User Involvement and Ideals About Free Research: Using Collaborative Autoethnography to Explore Researcher Experiences From a User Involvement Process\",\"authors\":\"Anne Werner,&nbsp;Ingrid Ruud Knutsen,&nbsp;Anne-Kari Johannessen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hex.70055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background and Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>User participation is a prerequisite for receiving research funding in healthcare in Norway. Despite many positive benefits, studies report challenges from users' and researchers' perspectives. Limited knowledge exists concerning researchers' experiences in scenarios where the users are professionals within healthcare and research. The aim of this retrospective study was to explore and reflect on personal experiences as researchers from a process of planning and developing research questions for a PhD project, following the James Lind Alliance guidelines, which were a requirement for funding. We focused on how the process of collaboration with a specific group of users influenced the researchers' sense of selves.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Design and Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>We used a qualitative design based on collaborative autoethnography, exploring personal experiences from a sociocultural point of view. Two of the three researchers in the team recollected their experiences from the user involvement process while applying the James Lind Alliance guidelines. We used different data sources to develop two autoethnographic narratives. The narratives were analysed using thematic analysis.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>The autoethnographic narratives demonstrate the complexity of user involvement from the researchers' perspectives. We identified four themes in the analysis: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, competing paradigms, hierarchy and dual roles. The accounts illustrated the researchers' ambivalence within the process, indicating that they feared a loss of control over the direction of the research project. The narratives visualised a struggle to appear as credible researchers, illustrating how the involvement of a specific group of users and adherence to a specific guideline for user involvement influenced the researchers' experiences of their roles and identities in the collaboration.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>The results point to the relevance of the sociocultural backdrop; researchers might become frontline providers of policy implementation in research, balancing tensions between regulatory constraints, user involvement and researchers' professional identity and research ideals, when a specific, detailed procedure for user involvement is required.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\\n \\n <p>Two user panels comprising participants from clinical practice, education and research, along with a service user, collaborated in the planning and development of research questions for a PhD project. This autoethnographic study elaborates this process.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55070,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Expectations\",\"volume\":\"27 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11462430/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Expectations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70055\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70055","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:在挪威,用户参与是获得医疗保健研究资金的先决条件。尽管用户参与有许多积极的好处,但从用户和研究人员的角度来看,研究报告也提出了一些挑战。在用户是医疗保健和研究领域的专业人员的情况下,研究人员的经验方面的知识有限。这项回顾性研究旨在探讨和反思作为研究人员的个人经历,即按照詹姆斯-林德联盟的指导方针,规划和制定博士项目的研究问题,这是获得资助的必要条件。我们重点关注与特定用户群体合作的过程如何影响研究人员的自我意识:我们采用了基于合作式自述的定性设计,从社会文化的角度探索个人经历。团队中的三位研究人员中,有两位回忆了他们在用户参与过程中的经历,同时运用了詹姆斯-林德联盟的指导方针。我们利用不同的数据来源编写了两篇自述。我们使用主题分析法对叙事进行了分析:结果:自传体叙述从研究人员的角度展示了用户参与的复杂性。我们在分析中确定了四个主题:内在和外在动机、相互竞争的范式、等级制度和双重角色。这些叙述反映了研究人员在研究过程中的矛盾心理,表明他们担心失去对研究项目方向的控制。这些叙述直观地反映了研究人员为成为可信的研究人员而进行的斗争,说明了特定用户群体的参与和对用户参与特定准则的遵守如何影响了研究人员在合作中的角色和身份体验:结论:研究结果表明了社会文化背景的相关性;研究人员可能会成为研究政策实施的第一线提供者,在监管限制、用户参与以及研究人员的专业身份和研究理想之间的紧张关系中取得平衡,这时就需要制定具体、详细的用户参与程序:由临床实践、教育和研究人员组成的两个用户小组以及一名服务用户共同参与了一个博士项目研究问题的规划和开发。这项自述式研究详细阐述了这一过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Between Public Guidelines for User Involvement and Ideals About Free Research: Using Collaborative Autoethnography to Explore Researcher Experiences From a User Involvement Process

Between Public Guidelines for User Involvement and Ideals About Free Research: Using Collaborative Autoethnography to Explore Researcher Experiences From a User Involvement Process

Background and Aim

User participation is a prerequisite for receiving research funding in healthcare in Norway. Despite many positive benefits, studies report challenges from users' and researchers' perspectives. Limited knowledge exists concerning researchers' experiences in scenarios where the users are professionals within healthcare and research. The aim of this retrospective study was to explore and reflect on personal experiences as researchers from a process of planning and developing research questions for a PhD project, following the James Lind Alliance guidelines, which were a requirement for funding. We focused on how the process of collaboration with a specific group of users influenced the researchers' sense of selves.

Design and Method

We used a qualitative design based on collaborative autoethnography, exploring personal experiences from a sociocultural point of view. Two of the three researchers in the team recollected their experiences from the user involvement process while applying the James Lind Alliance guidelines. We used different data sources to develop two autoethnographic narratives. The narratives were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

The autoethnographic narratives demonstrate the complexity of user involvement from the researchers' perspectives. We identified four themes in the analysis: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, competing paradigms, hierarchy and dual roles. The accounts illustrated the researchers' ambivalence within the process, indicating that they feared a loss of control over the direction of the research project. The narratives visualised a struggle to appear as credible researchers, illustrating how the involvement of a specific group of users and adherence to a specific guideline for user involvement influenced the researchers' experiences of their roles and identities in the collaboration.

Conclusion

The results point to the relevance of the sociocultural backdrop; researchers might become frontline providers of policy implementation in research, balancing tensions between regulatory constraints, user involvement and researchers' professional identity and research ideals, when a specific, detailed procedure for user involvement is required.

Patient or Public Contribution

Two user panels comprising participants from clinical practice, education and research, along with a service user, collaborated in the planning and development of research questions for a PhD project. This autoethnographic study elaborates this process.

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
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
×
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