Research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada: An environmental scan with stakeholder interviews.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Engaging youth throughout the research process improves research quality and outcomes. Youth advisory groups provide one way for youth to express their opinions on relevant issues.Objective
This study aimed to identify research- and health-related youth advisory groups ('groups') in Canada and understand the best practices of these groups.Methods
Google searches and supplementary methods were used to identify relevant groups in Canada. Group information was extracted from websites or through interviews with key informants.Results
We identified 40 groups. Groups were commonly part of a hospital/healthcare facility, nonprofit/health organization or research group. The majority focused on a specific content area, most commonly, mental health. Over half the groups advised on health services. Members' ages ranged from 9 to 35 years. The number of members ranged from 5 to 130. Interviews (n = 12) identified seven categories relating to group practices: (a) group purpose/objectives, (b) group development, (c) group operations, (d) group structure, (e) adult involvement, (f) membership and recruitment and (g) group access. Challenges and facilitators to the success of groups were described within the following themes: (a) retaining engagement, (b) creating a safe environment and (c) putting youth in positions of influence. Advice and recommendations were provided regarding the development of a new group.Conclusion
This study provides a comprehensive overview of research- and health-related youth advisory groups in Canada. This information can be used to identify groups that stakeholders could access as well as inform the development of a new group.Patient or public contribution
Youth advisory group representatives were interviewed as part of the study.
SUBMITTER: Chan M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8483214 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe inclusion of stakeholders throughout the research process has been gaining recognition as an approach that can improve the quality and impact of research. Stakeholder engagement for dementia care research has been identified as a national priority, though evaluation of engagement strategies and their impact has been limited. In dementia care research, stakeholders can include individuals living with dementia, family care partners, and health and social care professionals in dementia care. A Stakeholder Advisory Council (SAC) was established to identify priorities for dementia care research that are most important to stakeholders. Strategies to build capacity for research and facilitate engagement among the SAC were used to identify the research priorities. This study describes the experiences of SAC members engaged in the research process.MethodsTo evaluate stakeholder engagement, semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of the SAC to understand their experiences and perspectives on the strategies used to facilitate engagement and build capacity for research. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed using a mixed inductive and deductive approach. Findings were presented to members of the SAC to determine whether they felt their perspectives and experiences were accurately represented. Final domains and themes presented here were approved by the SAC.ResultsInterviews (N = 11) were conducted with members of the SAC representing each stakeholder group; persons living with dementia (n = 2); family care partners (n = 4), and health and social care professionals in dementia care (n = 5). Ten themes were categorized into four overarching domains: accessibility, council infrastructure, values and environment, and benefits of involvement.ConclusionsFindings from this qualitative study are a resource for researchers seeking to collaborate with diverse stakeholder groups to represent their perspectives in research, including individuals living with dementia. The domains and themes identified here support the inclusion of diverse stakeholders in the research process, centering engagement and capacity building strategies around individuals living with dementia.
| S-EPMC8300992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMany countries are currently rethinking their global health research funding priorities. When resources are limited, it is important to understand and use information about existing research strengths to inform research strategies and investments and to drive impact. This study describes a method to rapidly assess a country's global health research expertise and applies this method in the Canadian context.MethodsWe developed a three-pronged rapid environmental scan to evaluate Canadian global health research expertise that focused on research funding inputs, research activities and research outputs. We assessed research funding inputs from Canada's national health research funding agency and identified the 30 Canadian universities that received the most global health research funding. We systematically searched university websites and secondary databases to identify research activities, including research centres, research chairs and research training programmes. To evaluate research outputs, we searched PubMed to identify global health research publications by Canadian university-affiliated researchers. We used these three perspectives to develop a more nuanced understanding of Canadian strengths in global health research from different perspectives.ResultsCanada's main global health research funder, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, invested a total of $314 M from 2000 to 2016 on global health research grants. This investment has contributed to Canada's wealth of global health research expertise, including 12 training programmes, 27 Canada Research Chairs, 6 research centres and 30 WHO Collaborating Centres across 27 universities. Research activities were concentrated in Canada's biggest cities and most commonly focused on health equity and globalisation issues. Canadian-affiliated researchers have contributed to a research output of 822 unique publications on PubMed. There is an opportunity to build global health expertise in regions not already concentrated with research activity, focusing on transnational risks and neglected conditions research.ConclusionsOur three-pronged approach allowed us to rapidly identify clear geographic and substantive areas of strength in Canadian global health research, including urban regions and research focused on health equity and globalisation topics. This information can be used to support research policy directives, including to inform a Canadian global health research strategy, and to allow relevant academic institutions and funding organisations to make more strategic decisions regarding their future investments.
| S-EPMC7146898 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Multi-disciplinary heart failure (HF) clinics have been shown to improve outcomes for HF patients in randomized clinical trials. However, it is unclear how widely available specialized HF clinics are in Ontario. Also, the service models of current clinics have not been described. It is therefore uncertain whether the efficacy of HF clinics in trials is generalizable to the HF clinics currently operating in the province. METHODS: As part of a comprehensive evaluation of HF clinics in Ontario, we performed an environmental scan to identify all HF clinics operating in 2010. A semi-structured interview was conducted to understand the scope of practice. The intensity and complexity of care offered were quantified through the use of a validated instrument, and clinics were categorized as high, medium or low intensity clinics. RESULTS: We identified 34 clinics with 143 HF physicians. We found substantial regional disparity in access to care across the province. The majority of HF physicians were cardiologists (81%), with 81% of the clinics physically based in hospitals, of which 26% were academic centers. There was a substantial range in the complexity of services offered, most notably in the intensity of education and medication management services offered. All the clinics focused on ambulatory care, with only one having an in-patient focus. None of the HF clinics had a home-based component to care. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple HF clinics are currently operating in Ontario with a wide spectrum of care models. Further work is necessary to understand which components lead to improved patient outcomes.
| S-EPMC3506498 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveThe Respiratory Health Strategic Clinical Network (RHSCN) was launched to facilitate respiratory and sleep health through implementation of innovative, patient-centred, evidence-informed coordinated services in Alberta. In collaboration with project partners, the RHSCN aimed to determine the respiratory research priorities for Alberta.DesignThe four phases of this research prioritisation project were (1) identifying research questions from stakeholders, (2) determining which research questions had been answered in existing literature, (3) prioritising unanswered questions and (4) finalising the priorities through an inperson workshop.SettingThe study occurred in Alberta, Canada over a 2-year period beginning in March 2017.ParticipantsA total of 448 patients, clinicians and other stakeholders consented to participate in the survey.ResultsA total of 595 possible questions were submitted, with 343 unique questions identified. Of the questions, 94 were out of scope, 155 answered by existing literature and 10 were combined with others, while 83 were determined to be unanswered in the literature. Stakeholders were surveyed again to prioritise the remaining 83 questions and they were reviewed by the project's Steering Committee (clinicians and patients). At the inperson workshop, the Steering Committee identified 17 research topics as priority areas for respiratory and sleep research in Alberta.ConclusionA stakeholder-led research prioritisation process identified optimal clinical management/follow-up, equitable access to services, and management of social, psychological and mental health issues related to respiratory/sleep health as priority research areas.
| S-EPMC9226868 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite considerable investment in research priority setting within diverse fields of healthcare, little is known about the extent to which different stakeholder groups share research priorities. Conflicting priorities may jeopardize stakeholder engagement in research.To identify the research priorities of different stakeholder groups within mental health care and examine the extent and nature of agreement between them.Using a Delphi technique, we conducted parallel consultation processes within four different stakeholder groups. Each group process consisted of three rounds.The study was carried out within a mental health and learning disabilities trust in southern England. Participants were recruited from the following groups: mental health service users (34), informal carers (26), mental health practitioners (35) and service managers (23).There were striking differences between the four groups in respect of their ability and willingness to make priority decisions. These differences notwithstanding, there was considerable overlap in respect of their research interests. All groups identified and attached high importance to issues relating to the promotion of independence, self-esteem and recovery. The quality of in-patient care, the place of psychological therapies and the relationship between physical and mental health also emerged across the board.The confluence of four different stakeholder groups around a number of clear themes is highly encouraging, providing a framework within which to construct a research agenda and suggesting that mental health research can be built on solid partnerships.
| S-EPMC5060456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundObesity in Canada is a growing concern, but little is known about the available services for managing obesity in adults. Our objectives were to (a) survey and describe programs dedicated to weight management and (b) evaluate program adherence to established recommendations for care.MethodsWe conducted an online environmental scan in 2011 to identify adult weight management services throughout Canada. We examined the degree to which programs adhered to the 2006 Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management and Prevention of Obesity in Adults and Children (CCPGO) and the analysis criteria developed by the Association pour la Santé Publique du Québec (ASPQ).ResultsA total of 83 non-surgical (34 community-based, 42 primary care-based, 7 hospital-based) and 33 surgical programs were identified. All programs encouraged patient self-management. However, few non-surgical programs adhered to the CCPGO recommendations for assessment and intervention, and there was a general lack of screening for eating disorders, depression and other psychiatric diseases across all programs. Concordance with the ASPQ criteria was best among primary care-based programs, but less common in other settings with deficits most frequently revealed in multidisciplinary health assessment/management and physical activity counselling.ConclusionsWith more than 60% of Canadians overweight or obese, our findings highlight that availability of weight management services is far outstripped by need. Our observation that evidence-based recommendations are applied inconsistently across the country validates the need for knowledge translation of effective health services for managing obesity in adults.
| S-EPMC3927222 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundQuality indicators are important tools to measure and ultimately improve the quality of care provided. Performance measurement may be particularly helpful to grow disciplines that are underutilized and cost-effective, such as home dialysis (peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis).ObjectiveTo identify and catalog home dialysis quality indicators currently used in Canada, as well as to evaluate these indicators as a starting point for future collaboration and standardization of quality indicators across Canada.DesignAn environmental scan of quality indicators from provincial organizations, quality organizations, and stakeholders.SettingSixteen-member pan-Canadian panel with expertise in both nephrology and quality improvement.PatientsOur environmental scan included indicators relevant to patients on home dialysis.MeasurementsWe classified existing indicators based on the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and Donabedian frameworks.MethodsTo evaluate the indicators, a 6-person subcommittee conducted a modified version of the Delphi consensus technique based on the American College of Physicians/Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality criteria. We shared these consensus ratings with the entire 16-member panel for further examination. We rated items from 1 to 9 on 6 domains (1-3 does not meet criteria to 7-9 meets criteria) as well as a global final rating (1-3 unnecessary to 7-9 necessary) to distinguish high-quality from low-quality indicators.ResultsOverall, we identified 40 quality indicators across 7 provinces, with 22 (55%) rated as "necessary" to distinguish high quality from poor quality care. Ten indicators were measured by more than 1 province, and 5 of these indicators were rated as necessary (home dialysis prevalence, home dialysis incidence, anemia target achievement, rates of peritonitis associated with peritoneal dialysis, and home dialysis attrition). None of these indicators captured the IOM domains of timely, patient-centered, or equitable care.LimitationsThe environmental scan is a nonexhaustive list of quality indicators in Canada. The panel also lacked representation from patients, administrators, and allied health professionals.ConclusionsThese results provide Canadian home dialysis programs with a starting point on how to measure quality of care along with the current gaps. This work is an initial and necessary step toward future collaboration and standardization of quality indicators across Canada, so that home dialysis programs can access a smaller number of highly rated balanced indicators to motivate and support patient-centered quality improvement initiatives.
| S-EPMC7734484 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Working collaboratively and openly together with stakeholders has become a common phenomenon in research. While previous studies have gathered a clear picture on researchers' attitudes, motivations, and barriers for actively involving stakeholders in transdisciplinary research, the stakeholder perspective is yet unknown. Therefore, this paper sets out to identify how stakeholders perceive transdisciplinary collaborations with researchers. This paper in particular reveals the enablers and barriers for such collaborations from the viewpoint of stakeholders. To do so, we look at how stakeholders, who were actively involved in the governance structure of two "children with mentally ill parents" research groups in Austria, perceived their collaboration with researchers. We used a mixed-method, quantitative-qualitative design. We conducted an online survey and interviews with the members of the advisory board and competence group. These stakeholders reported great satisfaction with the transdisciplinary collaboration and emphasized the value of different expertise. As the most important enablers for successful, transdisciplinary collaboration stakeholders emphasized researchers' open-mindedness toward new perspectives and approaches, flexibility to adapt to the research process along the way, and creativity dealing with diverse backgrounds and skills. Stakeholders further underlined the importance of a person facilitating the collaboration process between researchers and stakeholders to resolve any tensions and insecurities. Concluding, researchers' attitudes, and in particular their understanding of the value of stakeholder involvement in research are key enablers for successful transdisciplinary research collaborations.
| S-EPMC8649715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In an age of biomedicalization, medical devices have become more common and more technologically complicated, and adverse events associated with medical devices have increased. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relies on advisory panels to assist in regulatory decision making regarding medical devices. Public meetings held by these advisory panels allow stakeholders to testify, presenting evidence and recommendations, according to careful procedural standards. This research examines the participation of six stakeholder groups (patients, advocates, physicians, researchers, industry representatives and FDA representatives) in FDA panel meetings focused on the safety of implantable medical devices between 2010-2020. We use qualitative and quantitative methods to analyze speakers' opportunities for participation, bases of evidence, and recommendations, applying the concept of 'scripting' to understand how this participation is shaped by regulatory structures. Regression analysis demonstrates statistically significant differences in speaking time, where researchers, industry, and FDA representatives had longer opening remarks and more exchanges with FDA panelists than patients. Patients, advocates and physicians shared the least amount of speaking time, and were the parties most likely to leverage patients' embodied knowledge and recommend the most stringent regulatory actions like recalls. Meanwhile, researchers, FDA, and industry representatives rely on scientific evidence and, with physicians, recommend actions that preserve medical technology access and clinical autonomy. This research highlights the scripted nature of public participation and the types of knowledge considered in medical device policymaking.
| S-EPMC9934387 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInternet use is nearly ubiquitous among US youth; risks to internet use include cyberbullying, privacy violations and unwanted solicitation. Internet safety education may prevent these negative consequences; however, it is unclear at what age this education should begin and what group is responsible for teaching this topic.MethodsSurveys were distributed to key stakeholders in youth safety education including public school teachers, clinicians, parents and adolescents. Surveys assessed age at which internet safety education should begin, as well as experiences teaching and learning internet safety. Surveys of adults assessed willingness to teach internet safety. Finally, participants were asked to identify a group whose primary responsibility it should be to teach internet safety.ResultsA total of 356 participants completed the survey (93.4% response rate), including 77 teachers, 111 clinicians, 72 parents and 96 adolescents. Stakeholders felt the optimal mean age to begin teaching internet safety was 7.2 years (SD?=?2.5), range 2-15. Internet safety was regularly taught by some teachers (20.8%), few clinicians (2.6%) and many parents (40.3%). The majority of teachers, clinicians and parents were willing to teach internet safety, but all groups surveyed identified parents as having primary responsibility for teaching this topic.ConclusionsFindings suggest agreement among key stakeholders for teaching internet safety at a young age, and for identifying parents as primary teachers of this topic. Clinicians have a unique opportunity to support parents by providing resources, guidance and support.
| S-EPMC3691757 | biostudies-literature