Nicole Wimmesberger, Thomas Bierbaum, Laura Keßler, Anna Levke Brütt, Erik Farin-Glattacker
{"title":"[卫生服务研究的研究伙伴:预备培训的需要、接受程度和可行性]。","authors":"Nicole Wimmesberger, Thomas Bierbaum, Laura Keßler, Anna Levke Brütt, Erik Farin-Glattacker","doi":"10.1055/a-2144-5973","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this online survey was to assess the need, acceptance and practical feasibility of a training program for research partners in health services research by patients and the public.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In January 2023, we sent the survey to patient associations and groups nationwide via Patient Advisory Board members of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF). The survey included both closed and open questions. The research team analysed the information provided by the participants (n=125) descriptively and used content analysis according to Kuckartz and Rädiker (2022).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority (90.4%) of respondents considered patient and the public involvement in the planning and implementation of scientific studies to be very or extremely important. 41.5% (17.9%) of respondents indicated that more than 10% (more than 25%) of patients would be willing to participate in free training and be available as research partners. More than three-quarters (76.8%) of respondents agreed that training was very or extremely important. Participants preferred written information (57.3%), short online training (56.5%) and short digital information sessions (53.2%). Frequently cited barriers to delivering training include travel costs (60%), time (53.3%) and the need for extensive prior information (48.3%). Participants' suggestions for successful training implementation included comprehensibility of the training program and its organisation (location, duration and format).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In addition to the high training needs of research partners, the results also reveal some obstacles. A compact, comprehensible and digital information event with written information material increases acceptance. Researchers should take these results into account when designing and implementing training programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":47653,"journal":{"name":"Gesundheitswesen","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11248941/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Research partners in health services research: need, acceptance and feasibility of preparatory trainings].\",\"authors\":\"Nicole Wimmesberger, Thomas Bierbaum, Laura Keßler, Anna Levke Brütt, Erik Farin-Glattacker\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2144-5973\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of this online survey was to assess the need, acceptance and practical feasibility of a training program for research partners in health services research by patients and the public.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In January 2023, we sent the survey to patient associations and groups nationwide via Patient Advisory Board members of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF). The survey included both closed and open questions. The research team analysed the information provided by the participants (n=125) descriptively and used content analysis according to Kuckartz and Rädiker (2022).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority (90.4%) of respondents considered patient and the public involvement in the planning and implementation of scientific studies to be very or extremely important. 41.5% (17.9%) of respondents indicated that more than 10% (more than 25%) of patients would be willing to participate in free training and be available as research partners. More than three-quarters (76.8%) of respondents agreed that training was very or extremely important. Participants preferred written information (57.3%), short online training (56.5%) and short digital information sessions (53.2%). Frequently cited barriers to delivering training include travel costs (60%), time (53.3%) and the need for extensive prior information (48.3%). Participants' suggestions for successful training implementation included comprehensibility of the training program and its organisation (location, duration and format).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In addition to the high training needs of research partners, the results also reveal some obstacles. A compact, comprehensible and digital information event with written information material increases acceptance. Researchers should take these results into account when designing and implementing training programs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47653,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gesundheitswesen\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11248941/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gesundheitswesen\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2144-5973\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2144-5973","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
[Research partners in health services research: need, acceptance and feasibility of preparatory trainings].
Aim: The aim of this online survey was to assess the need, acceptance and practical feasibility of a training program for research partners in health services research by patients and the public.
Method: In January 2023, we sent the survey to patient associations and groups nationwide via Patient Advisory Board members of the German Network for Health Services Research (DNVF). The survey included both closed and open questions. The research team analysed the information provided by the participants (n=125) descriptively and used content analysis according to Kuckartz and Rädiker (2022).
Results: The majority (90.4%) of respondents considered patient and the public involvement in the planning and implementation of scientific studies to be very or extremely important. 41.5% (17.9%) of respondents indicated that more than 10% (more than 25%) of patients would be willing to participate in free training and be available as research partners. More than three-quarters (76.8%) of respondents agreed that training was very or extremely important. Participants preferred written information (57.3%), short online training (56.5%) and short digital information sessions (53.2%). Frequently cited barriers to delivering training include travel costs (60%), time (53.3%) and the need for extensive prior information (48.3%). Participants' suggestions for successful training implementation included comprehensibility of the training program and its organisation (location, duration and format).
Conclusion: In addition to the high training needs of research partners, the results also reveal some obstacles. A compact, comprehensible and digital information event with written information material increases acceptance. Researchers should take these results into account when designing and implementing training programs.
期刊介绍:
The health service informs you comprehensively and up-to-date about the most important topics of the health care system. In addition to guidelines, overviews and comments, you will find current research results and contributions to CME-certified continuing education and training. The journal offers a scientific discussion forum and a platform for communications from professional societies. The content quality is ensured by a publisher body, the expert advisory board and other experts in the peer review process.