Recruiting for Engagement in Health Policy.

Q2 Medicine Healthcare Policy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.12927/hcpol.2024.27415
Joanna Massie, Katherine Boothe
{"title":"Recruiting for Engagement in Health Policy.","authors":"Joanna Massie, Katherine Boothe","doi":"10.12927/hcpol.2024.27415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Who participates in public and patient engagement processes, and in what capacity they participate, matters. The strategies employed to recruit participants shape the outcomes and legitimacy of engagement processes. We explore these issues through a case study of workshop recruitment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a mixed-methods study drawing on literature about existing theories of engagement, and integrated findings from the research team's own public engagement workshop in September 2022. We sought to align theoretical frameworks with practical approaches to recruiting for engagement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There are inherent trade-offs in recruitment methods. While the theory of recruitment is valuable, practical implementation is complex and highly context-dependent. Engaging existing partners and fostering relationships beyond specific events is crucial. Hybrid workshops and low-barrier honoraria promote participation; however, decisions about location and time create barriers. Finally, balancing trusting relationships with critical perspectives can create tension.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Recruitment is foundational for the engagement process, and requires flexibility, responsiveness and a realistic understanding of barriers. Our study suggests that there is no universal formula for ideal participant makeup or event format. Meaningful engagement requires ongoing dialogue and constant adjustment based on practice. Policy makers can use these insights to align recruitment and engagement strategies with their goals in order to move beyond quick, technocratic fixes.</p>","PeriodicalId":39389,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare Policy","volume":"20 SP","pages":"36-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11523121/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12927/hcpol.2024.27415","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Who participates in public and patient engagement processes, and in what capacity they participate, matters. The strategies employed to recruit participants shape the outcomes and legitimacy of engagement processes. We explore these issues through a case study of workshop recruitment.

Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study drawing on literature about existing theories of engagement, and integrated findings from the research team's own public engagement workshop in September 2022. We sought to align theoretical frameworks with practical approaches to recruiting for engagement.

Results: There are inherent trade-offs in recruitment methods. While the theory of recruitment is valuable, practical implementation is complex and highly context-dependent. Engaging existing partners and fostering relationships beyond specific events is crucial. Hybrid workshops and low-barrier honoraria promote participation; however, decisions about location and time create barriers. Finally, balancing trusting relationships with critical perspectives can create tension.

Discussion: Recruitment is foundational for the engagement process, and requires flexibility, responsiveness and a realistic understanding of barriers. Our study suggests that there is no universal formula for ideal participant makeup or event format. Meaningful engagement requires ongoing dialogue and constant adjustment based on practice. Policy makers can use these insights to align recruitment and engagement strategies with their goals in order to move beyond quick, technocratic fixes.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
招聘参与卫生政策的人员。
背景:谁参与了公众和患者参与过程,以及他们以何种身份参与,这些都很重要。招募参与者的策略决定了参与过程的结果和合法性。我们通过对研讨会招募的案例研究来探讨这些问题:我们采用混合方法进行研究,借鉴了有关现有参与理论的文献,并综合了研究团队自己于 2022 年 9 月举办的公众参与研讨会的结果。我们试图将理论框架与参与式招募的实际方法结合起来:招募方法存在固有的权衡。虽然招募理论很有价值,但实际实施却很复杂,而且高度依赖于具体情况。在具体活动之外,让现有合作伙伴参与进来并培养关系至关重要。混合研讨会和低门槛酬金促进了参与;但是,关于地点和时间的决定造成了障碍。最后,平衡信任关系与批评观点可能会造成紧张关系:招募是参与过程的基础,需要灵活性、响应性和对障碍的现实理解。我们的研究表明,理想的参与者构成或活动形式并没有通用的公式。有意义的参与需要持续对话,并根据实践不断调整。政策制定者可以利用这些见解,使招募和参与策略与其目标保持一致,从而超越快速、技术官僚式的解决方法。
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
Healthcare Policy
Healthcare Policy Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
"Whatever Job I'm In, I'm Going to Find a Way to Make a Difference" - A Black Community Leader's Perspective on Engagement and Advocacy. "You Can't Let Go" - A Black Community Leader's Perspective on Engagement and Advocacy. Black Community Health Advocates in Ontario: A Look at Health Policy Engagement From the Ground Up. Engaging Canadians in Health Policy Is no Trivial Matter. Ethical and Transformative Scholarly Public Engagement: Pitfalls, Possibilities and Promises.
×
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