Dataset Information

Participatory research in times of COVID-19 and beyond: Adjusting your methodological toolkits.

ABSTRACT: Solving grand environmental societal challenges calls for transdisciplinary and participatory methods in social-ecological research. These methods enable co-designing the research, co-producing the results, and co-creating the impacts together with concerned stakeholders. COVID-19 has had serious impacts on the choice of research methods, but reflections on recent experiences of "moving online" are still rare. In this perspective, we focus on the challenge of adjusting different participatory methods to online formats used in five transdisciplinary social-ecological research projects. The key added value of our research is the lessons learned from a comparison of the pros and cons of adjusting a broader set of methods to online formats. We conclude that combining the adjusted online approaches with well-established face-to-face formats into more inclusive hybrid approaches can enrich and diversify the pool of available methods for postpandemic research. Furthermore, a more diverse group of participants can be engaged in the research process.

SUBMITTER: Sattler C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8779601 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe teaching and learning experience of allied health and healthcare science students has altered because of the Covid-19 pandemic. Limited research has explored the experience on the future healthcare workforce using participatory research design. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of a global pandemic on the clinical and academic experiences of healthcare student using a co-production approach with student peer researchers.MethodsA participatory research approach adopting online focus groups facilitated by students trained as peer researchers was adopted. First, second and final year students from occupational therapy, physiotherapy, podiatry, healthcare science, diagnostic radiography and imaging, radiotherapy and oncology, and speech and language therapy were recruited to six focus groups. Data generated through focus groups were analysed thematically using the DEPICT model to support a partnership approach.ResultsTwenty-three participants took part in six focus groups. The themes identified were: rapid changes to learning; living alongside Covid-19 and psychological impact. Students preferred blended learning approaches when available, as reduced peer interaction, studying and sleeping in the same space, and technology fatigue decreased motivation.ConclusionDue to rapid changes in learning and the stress, anxiety and isolation created by the pandemic, managing study, personal life and placement resulted in a gap in confidence in clinical skills development for students. Students took their professional identity seriously, engaged in behaviours to reduce transmission of Covid-19 and employed a range of coping strategies to protect wellbeing. A challenge with the move to online delivery was the absence of informal peer learning and students indicated that moving forward they would value a hybrid approach to delivery. Higher Education should capitalise on innovative learning experiences developed during the pandemic however it is important to research the impact this has on student skill acquisition and learning experience.

Project description:BackgroundWe have followed the COVID-19 clinical trial research agenda from the beginning using the COVID-evidence.org platform. Now, two years after the COVID-19 pandemic started, our aim was to re-examine this research agenda with the latest data to provide a global perspective on the research landscape with a focus on Germany.MethodsWe reviewed and updated previously published data on the COVID-19 clinical research agenda as of 28February 2022 focusing on randomized trials. We used the COVID-evidence.org platform including registry entries from ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform as well as publications from the Living OVerview of Evidence platform for COVID-19 (L·OVE).ResultsTwo years on from the pandemic outbreak, there were 4,673 registered trials. The majority of these trials have remained small with a median of 120 planned participants (IQR 60-320). In the first hundred days of the pandemic most of them (50%) had been registered in China. More than two years later, the five countries with the most registered trials (alone or within a framework of international collaborations) were the USA (825 trials; 18%), Iran (619 trials; 13%), India (566 trials; 12%), China (353 trials; 8%), and Spain (309 trials; 7%). Only 119 trials were reported to have a study site in Germany (2.5% of the registered trials). Of the 4,673 trials registered, 15% (694 trials) had published their results by February 2022. The clinical research agenda has been marked by both successes, such as the large RECOVERY trial providing evidence on 10 treatments for COVID-19 including over 45,000 patients as of February 2022, and failures: worldwide only 57 randomized trials have been registered over two years that aimed to assess non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., face mask policies and lockdown measures) to prevent COVID-19, and only 11 of them had published results informing decisions that have an impact on the life of billions of people worldwide.ConclusionsThe COVID-19 clinical research agenda has highlighted the substantial effort of the research community but also the challenges of the clinical research ecosystem. Most importantly, it has shed light on the ability to circumvent traditional barriers and to make trials more useful even under extraordinary conditions. The time to learn our lessons and apply them is now, and the time to demonstrate how we have improved the system is before the next pandemic.

Dataset Information

Participatory research in times of COVID-19 and beyond: Adjusting your methodological toolkits.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets