Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
Improving the depth of data quality or increasing confusion? Reflections on a data analysis involving members of a self-help group for relatives of people living with dementia.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kowe Antonia, Köhler Stefanie, Teipel Stefan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Public involvement in research to improve data quality and to empower different stakeholders is good scientific practice, but rarely implemented across all research phases.
OBJECTIVE: This article reports on an attempt to involve members of a self-help group for relatives of people living with dementia as co-researchers in the data analysis in a short-term format.
METHODS: One researcher identified statements about assistive technologies from 17 interviews with people living with dementia and informal caregivers. Two researchers and six co-researchers independently assigned pre-defined values to these statements. Subsequently, we compared the values of the researchers and co-researchers.
RESULTS: The members of the self-help group identified four original values not considered by the researchers: consent, inclusion, participation and respect.
DISCUSSION: The involvement of co-researchers led to an improvement in the depth of data quality through the joint identification of values concerning assistive technology. Language barriers between researchers, co-researchers and interview participants impeded the data analysis.
CONCLUSION: The challenges and benefits of a participatory data analysis shown here can provide a basis for recommendations for target group-specific research involvement. Our recommendations relate to the recruitment of co-researchers, requirements for conducting a participatory data analysis and the participation degree of people involved.
PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The group of co-researchers participating in the data analysis consisted of relatives of people living with dementia.
OBJECTIVE: This article reports on an attempt to involve members of a self-help group for relatives of people living with dementia as co-researchers in the data analysis in a short-term format.
METHODS: One researcher identified statements about assistive technologies from 17 interviews with people living with dementia and informal caregivers. Two researchers and six co-researchers independently assigned pre-defined values to these statements. Subsequently, we compared the values of the researchers and co-researchers.
RESULTS: The members of the self-help group identified four original values not considered by the researchers: consent, inclusion, participation and respect.
DISCUSSION: The involvement of co-researchers led to an improvement in the depth of data quality through the joint identification of values concerning assistive technology. Language barriers between researchers, co-researchers and interview participants impeded the data analysis.
CONCLUSION: The challenges and benefits of a participatory data analysis shown here can provide a basis for recommendations for target group-specific research involvement. Our recommendations relate to the recruitment of co-researchers, requirements for conducting a participatory data analysis and the participation degree of people involved.
PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The group of co-researchers participating in the data analysis consisted of relatives of people living with dementia.