Practical Incorporation of Stakeholder-Informed Ethics into Research Funding Decisions.

IF 0.8 4区 医学 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action Pub Date : 2024-01-01
Merton Lee, Nicole Brandt, Carmen E Reyes, Daniel Mansour, Katie Maslow, Catherine Sarkisian
{"title":"Practical Incorporation of Stakeholder-Informed Ethics into Research Funding Decisions.","authors":"Merton Lee, Nicole Brandt, Carmen E Reyes, Daniel Mansour, Katie Maslow, Catherine Sarkisian","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research funding has been criticized as biased against novel initiatives and lacking diversity, which leads to further disparities. Patient and stakeholder engagement could support research that goes beyond traditional paradigms and increases diversity. However, best practices to engage stakeholders in research, including funding decisions, continue to be developed. We report on the implementation of stakeholder input in two federally funded initiatives, one that seeks to advance research reducing disparities, and the other seeks to advance deprescribing research. Overall, the review process includes stakeholders as decision makers and supports their efforts through group discussion and other activities. Reconciling stakeholder input that may differ from scientific peer review is a challenge within the decision for funding. Lessons learned include balancing stakeholder and scientific assessments and including guidance on stakeholder engagement to grant awardees.</p>","PeriodicalId":46970,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Community Health Partnerships-Research Education and Action","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research funding has been criticized as biased against novel initiatives and lacking diversity, which leads to further disparities. Patient and stakeholder engagement could support research that goes beyond traditional paradigms and increases diversity. However, best practices to engage stakeholders in research, including funding decisions, continue to be developed. We report on the implementation of stakeholder input in two federally funded initiatives, one that seeks to advance research reducing disparities, and the other seeks to advance deprescribing research. Overall, the review process includes stakeholders as decision makers and supports their efforts through group discussion and other activities. Reconciling stakeholder input that may differ from scientific peer review is a challenge within the decision for funding. Lessons learned include balancing stakeholder and scientific assessments and including guidance on stakeholder engagement to grant awardees.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
将利益相关者知情的伦理观切实纳入研究资助决策。
研究资金被批评为偏向于新颖的举措,缺乏多样性,从而导致进一步的差异。患者和利益相关者的参与可以支持超越传统范式和增加多样性的研究。然而,让利益相关者参与研究(包括资助决策)的最佳实践仍有待开发。我们报告了在两项联邦政府资助的倡议中利益相关者意见的落实情况,其中一项倡议旨在推进减少差异的研究,另一项倡议旨在推进去处方化研究。总体而言,审查过程将利益相关者作为决策者,并通过小组讨论和其他活动支持他们的工作。利益相关者的意见可能不同于科学同行评审,如何协调利益相关者的意见是资助决策中的一项挑战。吸取的经验教训包括平衡利益相关者和科学评估,并为获得资助者提供利益相关者参与指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
期刊最新文献
Lessons from Two Latino Communities Working with Academic Partners to Increase Access to COVID-19 Testing. Infectious Disease Preparedness for Homeless Populations: Recommendations from a Community-Academic Partnership. Evaluating the Impact and Effectiveness of Flint's Community Ethics Review Board (CBOP-CERB): A Pilot Study. Bridging the Gap: Addressing Immigrant Health Through Community-initiated Screening Events. Engaging with Rural Communities for Colorectal Cancer Screening Outreach Using Modified Boot Camp Translation.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1