Around the world there is a growing recognition of the value of involving service-users (for example, patients and their unpaid caregivers) and members of the public in research. However, it is not always clear how best to do this and whether or not the views and values of the patients, the public and researchers match up when it comes to working together to do this.
A recent workshop and study led by the Cicely Saunders Institute has been conducted to examine this – to work out how best to deliver patient and public involvement in palliative care research.
The findings from the project were informed by a consensus-building strategy called the nominal group technique. This technique, which was used in a workshop, helped provide structure to the process of generating content and identifying the participant’s priorities related to three important questions:
- How can patients, families and the public contribute to research in order to improve its quality and relevance?
- How might patient, family and public involvement work best at the CSI?
- How can researchers and patients, families and the public benefit from patient/family and public involvement?
Read the full article on the UK edition of ehospice.