评估1型糖尿病校本研究中利益相关者参与的影响。

Q3 Medicine Diabetes Spectrum Pub Date : 2021-11-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-03 DOI:10.2337/ds21-0004
Christine A March, Traci M Kazmerski, Christine Moon, Ingrid M Libman, Elizabeth Miller
{"title":"评估1型糖尿病校本研究中利益相关者参与的影响。","authors":"Christine A March,&nbsp;Traci M Kazmerski,&nbsp;Christine Moon,&nbsp;Ingrid M Libman,&nbsp;Elizabeth Miller","doi":"10.2337/ds21-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Although the importance of stakeholder engagement (SE) for patient-centered research is recognized, few studies document SE processes and influence on research outcomes in the diabetes field. We applied a research-informed framework to evaluate the impact of SE on a pediatric diabetes study exploring school nurse perspectives on modern diabetes devices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited parents of children with type 1 diabetes, school nurses, and diabetes providers. Stakeholders convened virtually every 2 months for 12 months. Goals for SE included input on research materials, interpretation of findings, and future research directions. Processes were assessed using a validated survey. Immediate outcomes included changes to research materials and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included research efficiency and value (acceptance by community partners).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Each role was represented at every meeting. The majority of stakeholders (>70%) completed the survey at study midpoint and end points. All surveyed indicated that they had received all desired information, shared feedback, and felt valued. Stakeholders were satisfied with the meeting frequency. Participants appreciated learning from each other and expressed enthusiasm for continued research participation. They described their role as one of consultant rather than research team members. SE resulted in five additional interview questions. Nearly 70 comments added to the interpretation of qualitative themes. Findings were published within 12 months and recognized by the state school nursing organization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SE was well received and led to meaningful changes in content and dissemination of a diabetes study. A systematic approach to evaluating SE can increase scientific rigor and reproducibility and contribute to best practices for SE in diabetes research.</p>","PeriodicalId":39737,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes Spectrum","volume":" ","pages":"419-424"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8603124/pdf/diaspectds210004.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Impact of Stakeholder Engagement in a School-Based Type 1 Diabetes Study.\",\"authors\":\"Christine A March,&nbsp;Traci M Kazmerski,&nbsp;Christine Moon,&nbsp;Ingrid M Libman,&nbsp;Elizabeth Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.2337/ds21-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Although the importance of stakeholder engagement (SE) for patient-centered research is recognized, few studies document SE processes and influence on research outcomes in the diabetes field. We applied a research-informed framework to evaluate the impact of SE on a pediatric diabetes study exploring school nurse perspectives on modern diabetes devices.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited parents of children with type 1 diabetes, school nurses, and diabetes providers. Stakeholders convened virtually every 2 months for 12 months. Goals for SE included input on research materials, interpretation of findings, and future research directions. Processes were assessed using a validated survey. Immediate outcomes included changes to research materials and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included research efficiency and value (acceptance by community partners).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Each role was represented at every meeting. The majority of stakeholders (>70%) completed the survey at study midpoint and end points. All surveyed indicated that they had received all desired information, shared feedback, and felt valued. Stakeholders were satisfied with the meeting frequency. Participants appreciated learning from each other and expressed enthusiasm for continued research participation. They described their role as one of consultant rather than research team members. SE resulted in five additional interview questions. Nearly 70 comments added to the interpretation of qualitative themes. Findings were published within 12 months and recognized by the state school nursing organization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SE was well received and led to meaningful changes in content and dissemination of a diabetes study. A systematic approach to evaluating SE can increase scientific rigor and reproducibility and contribute to best practices for SE in diabetes research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39737,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diabetes Spectrum\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"419-424\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8603124/pdf/diaspectds210004.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diabetes Spectrum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2337/ds21-0004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/8/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes Spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2337/ds21-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:虽然利益相关者参与(SE)对以患者为中心的研究的重要性已经得到认可,但很少有研究记录糖尿病领域的SE过程及其对研究结果的影响。我们采用了一个研究知情的框架来评估SE对儿童糖尿病研究的影响,该研究探讨了学校护士对现代糖尿病设备的看法。方法:我们招募了1型糖尿病儿童的家长、学校护士和糖尿病医护人员。利益相关者几乎每两个月召开一次会议,持续12个月。SE的目标包括对研究材料的输入、对研究结果的解释以及未来的研究方向。使用有效的调查对流程进行评估。直接结果包括研究材料的变化和满意度。次要结果包括研究效率和价值(社区合作伙伴的接受程度)。结果:每个角色在每次会议上都有代表。大多数利益相关者(>70%)在研究中点和结束点完成了调查。所有被调查的人都表示,他们已经收到了所有想要的信息,分享了反馈,并感到受到重视。利益相关者对会议频率感到满意。与会者赞赏相互学习,并表达了继续参与研究的热情。他们将自己的角色描述为顾问之一,而不是研究团队成员。SE导致了5个额外的面试问题。近70条评论增加了对定性主题的解释。研究结果在12个月内发表,并得到了州立学校护理组织的认可。结论:SE在糖尿病研究的内容和传播上得到了很好的接受和有意义的改变。一个系统的方法来评估SE可以提高科学的严谨性和可重复性,并有助于SE在糖尿病研究中的最佳实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Evaluating the Impact of Stakeholder Engagement in a School-Based Type 1 Diabetes Study.

Objective: Although the importance of stakeholder engagement (SE) for patient-centered research is recognized, few studies document SE processes and influence on research outcomes in the diabetes field. We applied a research-informed framework to evaluate the impact of SE on a pediatric diabetes study exploring school nurse perspectives on modern diabetes devices.

Methods: We recruited parents of children with type 1 diabetes, school nurses, and diabetes providers. Stakeholders convened virtually every 2 months for 12 months. Goals for SE included input on research materials, interpretation of findings, and future research directions. Processes were assessed using a validated survey. Immediate outcomes included changes to research materials and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included research efficiency and value (acceptance by community partners).

Results: Each role was represented at every meeting. The majority of stakeholders (>70%) completed the survey at study midpoint and end points. All surveyed indicated that they had received all desired information, shared feedback, and felt valued. Stakeholders were satisfied with the meeting frequency. Participants appreciated learning from each other and expressed enthusiasm for continued research participation. They described their role as one of consultant rather than research team members. SE resulted in five additional interview questions. Nearly 70 comments added to the interpretation of qualitative themes. Findings were published within 12 months and recognized by the state school nursing organization.

Conclusion: SE was well received and led to meaningful changes in content and dissemination of a diabetes study. A systematic approach to evaluating SE can increase scientific rigor and reproducibility and contribute to best practices for SE in diabetes research.

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
Diabetes Spectrum
Diabetes Spectrum Medicine-Internal Medicine
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: The mission of Diabetes Spectrum: From Research to Practice is to assist health care professionals in the development of strategies to individualize treatment and diabetes self-management education for improved quality of life and diabetes control. These goals are achieved by presenting review as well as original, peer-reviewed articles on topics in clinical diabetes management, professional and patient education, nutrition, behavioral science and counseling, educational program development, and advocacy. In each issue, the FROM RESEARCH TO PRACTICE section explores, in depth, a diabetes care topic and provides practical application of current research findings.
期刊最新文献
Diabetes Care at Summer Camps. Diabetes in Diverse Settings. Managing Type 1 Diabetes in an Inpatient Child Psychiatric Care Setting. Multidisciplinary Diabetes Management and Education Strategies in the Inpatient Rehabilitation Setting. Standardizing Diabetes Care in Colorado Schools: Nearly Two Decades of Success.
×
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