Patient-Centered Outcomes Research: A “New” Research Agenda

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rita H. Pickler ◽  
Heather L. Tubbs-Cooley
2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (Supp) ◽  
pp. 303-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley Wennerstrom ◽  
Benjamin F. Springgate ◽  
Felica Jones ◽  
Diana Meyers ◽  
Norris Henderson ◽  
...  

The Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) supports patient-centered clinical comparative effectiveness research (CER) including health disparities and engagement portfolios. In 2013, PCORI launched the Pipeline to Proposal (P2P) mechanism to support development of nov­el patient- and stakeholder-centered part­nerships focused on designing clinical CER funding proposals. By providing a tiered structure of successive small contracts and technical assistance, the P2P mechanism encourages development of new research partnerships among diverse stakeholders. As a comparatively new field, patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) has few well-delineated methods for engaging patients and other non-scientists in effective teams with academics or clinicians to develop and implement rigorous, scientific research pro­posals. Community partnered participatory research (CPPR) provides a useful frame­work for structuring new partnerships.In this article we highlight the origins, de­velopment, and prospects of three current examples of funded P2P initiatives based in New Orleans and Los Angeles. We outline how these projects – Prisoner to Patient, the NOLA Partnership, and Resilience Among African American Men – use CPPR principles. We also describe how they have collaborated with, and contributed to, a two-way learning and knowledge exchange among members of the PCORI-funded Community and Patient Partnered Research Network. Lessons learned may be ap­plicable to other groups planning to create new partnerships focused on implementing PCOR.Ethn Dis. 2018;28(Suppl 2):303- 310; doi:10.18865/ed.28.S2.303.


2013 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 393-400 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael Fleurence ◽  
Joe V. Selby ◽  
Kara Odom-Walker ◽  
Gail Hunt ◽  
David Meltzer ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 1111-1118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda J. Burns ◽  
Beatrice Abbetti ◽  
Stacie D. Arnold ◽  
Jeffrey Bender ◽  
Susan Doughtie ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Andrea Felicetti

Resilient socioeconomic unsustainability poses a threat to democracy whose importance has yet to be fully acknowledged. As the prospect of sustainability transition wanes, so does perceived legitimacy of institutions. This further limits representative institutions’ ability to take action, making democratic deepening all the more urgent. I investigate this argument through an illustrative case study, the 2017 People’s Climate March. In a context of resilient unsustainability, protesters have little expectation that institutions might address the ecological crisis and this view is likely to spread. New ways of thinking about this problem and a new research agenda are needed.


Author(s):  
I-Chieh Michelle Yang

This conceptual paper proposes a new research agenda in travel risk research by understanding the role of affect. Extant scholarship tends to focus on travel risk perception or assessment as a cognitive psychological process. However, despite the phenomenal growth of the tourism industry globally, research related to travel risk perception remains stagnant with no significant breakthrough. Drawing on the existing empirical evidences in risk-related research, this paper asserts that affect plays a potent role in influencing travel risk perception – positive affect leads to more positive travel risk perception, vice versa. In this paper, existing empirical evidences and theories are presented to provide support for this proposition.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Erica Sood ◽  
Jeffrey P Jacobs ◽  
Bradley S Marino

Abstract Neurodevelopmental and psychosocial impairments negatively impact health-related quality of life for survivors with CHD and complicate the transition to independent adulthood. Risk for neurodevelopmental and psychosocial impairments is influenced by a complex interplay among genetic, foetal, surgical, perioperative, family, and social factors, requiring a multi-pronged approach to neuroprotection and intervention. To ensure future research can ultimately reduce the burden of CHD for individuals, families, and society, the most pressing issues in cardiac neurodevelopment requiring scientific investigation must be identified. Through funding from an R13 Grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health of the United States of America, the Cardiac Neurodevelopmental Outcome Collaborative convened a two-day meeting of international experts in cardiac neurodevelopmental and psychosocial research, clinical care, and health disparities, including patient and family stakeholders, to define the cardiac neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes research agenda for the next decade. Seven multidisciplinary working groups were formed to address key domains crucial to the advancement of cardiac neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes research: 1) Foetal Brain Development and Neuroprotection, 2) Surgical/Perioperative Neuroprotection and Neurodevelopment, 3) Characterization of Neurodevelopmental and Psychological Outcomes, 4) Neurodevelopmental and Psychosocial Intervention, 5) Parent Mental Health and Family Functioning, 6) Neurodevelopmental Education, Outreach and Advocacy, and 7) Health Disparities and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes. Working groups identified significant gaps in knowledge and critical questions that must be answered to further knowledge, policy, care, and outcomes. The development of a research agenda in cardiac neurodevelopmental and psychosocial outcomes is critical for informing collaborative initiatives and allocation of funding for research to scientific inquiries of highest value to key stakeholders.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document