scholarly journals Patient and Other Stakeholder Engagement in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Funded Studies of Patients with Kidney Diseases

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1703-1712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Cukor ◽  
Lewis M. Cohen ◽  
Elizabeth L. Cope ◽  
Nasrollah Ghahramani ◽  
S. Susan Hedayati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Kidney Diseases ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Research Institute

scholarly journals Unanticipated Therapeutic Value of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Stakeholder Engagement Project for Homebound Older Adults

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1172-1173
Author(s):  
Orla C. Sheehan ◽  
Christine S. Ritchie ◽  
Sarah B. Garrett ◽  
Krista L. Harrison ◽  
Alexandria Mickler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Therapeutic Value ◽  
Homebound Older Adults ◽  
Research Institute

scholarly journals Methods guiding stakeholder engagement in planning a pragmatic study on changing stroke systems of care

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabina B. Gesell ◽  
Karen Potvin Klein ◽  
Jacqueline Halladay ◽  
Janet Prvu Bettger ◽  
Janet Freburger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Transitional Care ◽  
Systems Of Care ◽  
Hospital Readmissions ◽  
Pragmatic Trial ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Research Institute

Background: The Comprehensive Post-Acute Stroke Services (COMPASS) Study is one of the first large pragmatic randomized-controlled clinical trials using comparative effectiveness research methods, funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. In the COMPASS Study, we compare the effectiveness of a patient-centered, transitional care intervention versus usual care for stroke patients discharged home from acute care. Outcomes include stroke patient post-discharge functional status and caregiver strain 90 days after discharge, and hospital readmissions. A central tenet of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute-funded research is stakeholder engagement throughout the research process. However, evidence on how to successfully implement a pragmatic trial that changes systems of care in combination with robust stakeholder engagement is limited. This combination is not without challenges. Methods: We present our approach for broad-based stakeholder engagement in the context of a pragmatic trial with the participation of patients, caregivers, community stakeholders, including the North Carolina Stroke Care Collaborative hospital network, and policy makers. To maximize stakeholder engagement throughout the COMPASS Study, we employed a conceptual model with the following components: (1) Patient and Other Stakeholder Identification and Selection; (2) Patient and Other Stakeholder Involvement Across the Spectrum of Research Activities; (3) Dedicated Resources for Patient and Other Stakeholder Involvement; (4) Support for Patient and Other Stakeholder Engagement Through Organizational Processes; (5) Communication with Patients and Other Stakeholders; (6) Transparent Involvement Processes; (7) Tracking of Engagement; and (8) Evaluation of Engagement. Conclusion: In this paper, we describe how each component of the model is being implemented and how this approach addresses existing gaps in the literature on strategies for engaging stakeholders in meaningful and useful ways when conducting pragmatic trials.

scholarly journals FP02.08 Importance of Stakeholder Engagement in a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. S192
Author(s):  
V. Musigdilok ◽  
B. Creekmur ◽  
E. Rozema ◽  
M. Gould
Keyword(s):  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Patient Centered

The advent of a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 716
Author(s):  
C. Daniel Mullins
Keyword(s):  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Research Institute

scholarly journals How Well Does the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Fund Primary Care and Comparative Effectiveness Research?

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (9) ◽  
pp. 1680-1681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Balster ◽  
Stephany Mazur ◽  
Andrew Bazemore ◽  
Daniel J. Merenstein
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness Research ◽  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Effectiveness Research ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Research Institute

Health Reform’s Tortuous Route To The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 1777-1782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kavita Patel
Keyword(s):  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Research Institute

scholarly journals Training patients to review scientific reports for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: an observational study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. e028732
Author(s):  
Ilya Ivlev ◽  
Kelly J Vander Ley ◽  
Jack Wiedrick ◽  
Kira Lesley ◽  
Amy Forester ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Online Training ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Quality Improvement Effort ◽  
Patient Advocates ◽  
Research Institute

ObjectiveThe peer review of completed Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) funded research includes reviews from patient reviewers (patients, caregivers, and patient advocates). Very little is known about how best to support these reviewers in writing helpful comments from a patient-centred perspective. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a new training in peer review for patient reviewers.DesignObservational study.SettingOnline.ParticipantsAdults registered in the PCORI Reviewer Database as a patient stakeholder.InterventionA new online training in peer review.Main outcome measuresChanges in reviewers’ knowledge and skills; change in self-efficacy and attitudes, satisfaction with the training and perceived benefits and relevance of the training.ResultsBefore-after training survey data were analysed for 37 (29.4% of 126) patient reviewers invited to participate in an online training as part of a quality improvement effort or as part of a PCORI peer review. The reviewers improved their answers to the knowledge questions (p<0.001, median number of answers improved 4 (95% CI 3 to 5), large effect size (ES) Cohen’sw=0.94) after the training, particularly in the questions targeting the specifics of PCORI peer review. Reviewers improved their skills in recognising helpful review comments, but those without peer-review background improved proportionally more (p=0.008, median number of answers improved 2 (95% CI 1 to 3), medium ESw=0.60). The use of training modestly increased reviewers’ confidence in completing a high-quality peer review (p=0.005, mean increase in 5-point Likert rating 0.51 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.86), small-to-medium ES Cliff’sdelta=0.32) and their excitement about providing a review slightly increased (p=0.019, mean increase in 5-point Likert rating 0.35 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.68), small ESdelta=0.19). All reviewers were satisfied with the training and would recommend it to other reviewers.ConclusionsTraining improved knowledge, skills and self-efficacy and slightly increased enthusiasm for completing a PCORI peer review.

scholarly journals A New Taxonomy for Stakeholder Engagement in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 985-991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas W. Concannon ◽  
Paul Meissner ◽  
Jo Anne Grunbaum ◽  
Newell McElwee ◽  
Jeanne-Marie Guise ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcomes Research ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Patient Centered
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document