Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-ms7nj Total loading time: 0.253 Render date: 2022-08-16T20:22:31.653Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Identification of research priorities in CHD: empowering patients and families through participation in the development of formal research agendas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2022

Joseph Burns*
Affiliation:
Cohen Children’s Medical Center, Queens, NY, USA
Amy Basken
Affiliation:
Conquering CHD, Madison, WI, USA
Rebeka Acosta
Affiliation:
A+J Patient Advocacy, LLC, Las Vegas, NV, USA
Mauricio Garnier-Villarreal
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Aparna Kulkarni
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Cohen Children’s Medical Center, Queens, NY, USA
Denise A. Hayes
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatric Cardiology, Cohen Children’s Medical Center, Queens, NY, USA
*
Author for correspodence: J. Burns, Cohen Children’s Medical Center, Queens, NY, USA. Tel: 718-470-3496; Fax: 718-470-3935. E-mail jburns9@northwell.edu

Abstract

Background:

Conquering CHD, formerly known as the Pediatric Congenital Heart Association (PCHA), is the leading congenital heart disease (CHD) patient advocacy organisation in the United States of America, and places high priority on patient engagement in the research process. Participatory design is an approach to problem-solving that utilises the knowledge and opinions of groups of people to generate plans and new ideas. Utilising this mode of patient engagement, patients and families engaged with Conquering CHD assisted in developing a list of research priorities which was then distributed to the larger membership with instructions to rank the priorities in order of importance. Upon completion, these items were compared to the current scientific literature to assess correlation with current publications. This cross-sectional study and literature review aimed to assess the priorities of patients and families in CHD research and to determine the reflection of these areas in the current body of scientific literature.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study utilised a survey asking participants to rank the importance of research items within categories including “Technology Advances,” “Genetic and Cellular Research,” “Broad Understanding of CHD,” and “Psychosocial Outcomes” which was distributed through social media and email to 43,168 accounts across all platforms. Respondents were asked to place each item in a ranked order in each category, with the value “1” representing the most preferred for each participant. Anyone engaged with Conquering CHD was eligible to complete the study, including patients and families. Subsequently, a literature review of the largest medical databases including PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect was undertaken to determine the number of articles published per each topic which was then assessed to determine if there is a correlation between patient-ranked priorities and the current body of literature.

Results:

The study generated a total response of 527 participants. Regarding “Technology Advances,” valve replacement was the preferred topic (mean rank 2.07, IQR 2). Stem cell research was the favoured topic in “Genetic and Cellular Research” (mean rank 2.53, IQR 2). Access to care was the priority in the “Broadening Understanding of CHD” (mean rank 1.24, IQR 1). Pertaining to “Psychosocial Outcomes”, psychological/emotional effects was the highest ranked topic (mean rank 1.46, IQR 1). The literature review returned a total of 135,672 articles in the areas of interest. For “Valve Replacement”, 8361 articles resulted reflecting a proportion of 0.097 of total articles. For “Stem Cell Research”, 9921 articles resulted reflecting a proportion of 0.115 of total articles. For “Access to Care”, 7845 articles resulted reflecting a proportion of 0.091 of total articles. For “Psychological/Emotional Effects”, 6422 articles resulted reflecting a proportion of 0.074 of total articles. A Spearman’s correlation demonstrated no correlation between the preferred domain of CHD research and the number of articles published for that domain (rs = 0.02, p = 0.94).

Conclusions:

This process demonstrates the effectiveness of participatory design, using a patient and family network to determine the research items of concern to those affected by CHD. The cross-sectional survey was effective in assessing patient and family priorities but was limited by access to reliable internet and delivery only in English. Though the study had a large response rate, it was limited to patients already engaged with Conquering CHD. For these reasons, it may not completely reflect the opinions of the total population affected by CHD. However, this offers valuable insight into patient-determined priorities and reveals that the current scientific literature does not correlate with these items. These data serve to inform individual and institutional research agendas to better reflect the needs and desires of this population.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Marshall, P, Cain, R, Payne, S. Situated crowdsourcing: A pragmatic approach to encouraging participation in healthcare design. In: 2011 5th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth) and Workshops. Dublin, Ireland, 2011: 555558.Google Scholar
Weiner, M. The potential of crowdsourcing to improve patient-centered care. The Patient 2014; 7: 123127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCartney, P. Crowdsourcing in healthcare. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs 2013; 38: 392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Donetto, S, Pierri, P, Tsianakas, V, Robert, G. Experience-based co-design and healthcare improvement: realizing participatory design in the public sector. Des J 2015; 2: 227248.Google Scholar
Tucker, JD, Day, S, Tang, W, Bayus, B. Crowdsourcing in medical research: concepts and applications. Peer J 2019; 7: e6762.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2019.Google Scholar
Bürkner, PC. brms: an R package for Bayesian multilevel models using stan. J Stat Softw 2017; 80: 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, D. Bayesian Statistics for the Social Sciences. The Guilford Press, New York, 2014.Google Scholar
Gelman, A, Carlin, J, Stern, H, Dunson, D, Vehtari, A, Rubin, D. Bayesian Data Analysis. Chapman & Hall/CRC Texts in Statistical Science, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2014.Google Scholar
Hox, JJ, Moerbeek, M, Van de Schoot, R. Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications, 3rd edn. Routledge, New York, 2018.Google Scholar
Gilboa, SM, Devine, OJ, Kucik, JE, et al. Congenital heart defects in the United States: estimating the magnitude of the affected population in 2010. Circulation 2016; 134: 101109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flores, G. Racial and ethnic disparities in the health and health care of children. Pediatrics 2010; 125: 9791020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Identification of research priorities in CHD: empowering patients and families through participation in the development of formal research agendas
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Identification of research priorities in CHD: empowering patients and families through participation in the development of formal research agendas
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Identification of research priorities in CHD: empowering patients and families through participation in the development of formal research agendas
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *