Guest editorial: public and user ‘involvement’ in the UK National Health Service

Harrison, Stephen; Dowswell, George; Milewa, Timothy

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2524.2002.00342.x

Cited by 58 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This form of collaboration is gaining currency with researchers and policy-makers alike as it is recognised as being a more democratic approach towards research and the decision-making process [3][4][5][6].…”

Section: Participant Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network 1000: Surveying the changing needs and lifestyles of 1000 visually impaired people — Indicative results from generative interviews

Corcoran

Douglas

McCall

et al. 2005

International Congress Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Participant Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Network 1000: Surveying the changing needs and lifestyles of 1000 visually impaired people — Indicative results from generative interviews

Corcoran

Douglas

McCall

et al. 2005

International Congress Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This form of collaboration is commonly known as 'user involvement' (see, for example, Beresford, 2001;Truman and Raine, 2001;Beresford, 2002;Harrison et al, 2002;Tritter et al, 2003;Beverley et al, 2004) and is recognized as being a more democratic approach to policy and decision-making. This integrative approach is a central plank of UK government care and social policy and is reflected in initiatives such as 'Caring for People' (Department of Health (DoH), 1989), 'National Health Service (NHS) and Community Care Act: The NHS Plan for Investment', followed in the year 2000 by 'A Plan for Reform' (Beresford and Croft, 2001;Truman and Raine, 2001;Harrison et al, 2002;Beverley et al, 2004).…”

Section: An Underlying Philosophy -'Participant Involvement'mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This integrative approach is a central plank of UK government care and social policy and is reflected in initiatives such as 'Caring for People' (Department of Health (DoH), 1989), 'National Health Service (NHS) and Community Care Act: The NHS Plan for Investment', followed in the year 2000 by 'A Plan for Reform' (Beresford and Croft, 2001;Truman and Raine, 2001;Harrison et al, 2002;Beverley et al, 2004).…”

Section: An Underlying Philosophy -'Participant Involvement'mentioning

confidence: 99%

Network 1000: the changing needs and circumstances of visually-impaired people: project overview

Corcoran

Douglas²,

Pavey³

et al. 2004

British Journal of Visual Impairment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article outlines the progress of a newlycommissioned three year study known as Network 1000. It is a three-year project funded through the Community Fund and is being carried out by the University of Birmingham on behalf of Vision 2020. The project's aim is to create a panel survey of 1000 visually-impaired people to be interviewed regularly over the threeyear period, and hopefully beyond, enabling their changing needs and circumstances to be monitored over time. The findings will be used to influence policy-makers and service-providers, and will also be disseminated to a wider audience of people with an interest in visual impairment. Building on the longitudinal nature of the project enables the project team to develop a methodology that is both democratic and inclusive. The underlying research philosophy is one of inclusion and participation and in this respect the people this research affects the most -those who are visually impaired -are involved in all stages of the research process. People with a visual impairment have played a key role in generating the data and the themes that will drive the construction of the main survey instrument. The article is divided into five sections that describe the progress of the project to date: first, it briefly outlines the background to the project; second, it describes the underlying philosophy behind the democratic approach to inclusion and participant involvement; third, it presents preliminary results from generative interviews; fourth, it discusses how the team will recruit participants to the project with particular reference to the two-stage sample design that has been adopted; and finally, it describes how this two-stage approach will be operationalized. The article concludes by outlining the next phase of the project and with a short reflection on the research process to date.

show abstract

“…As a matter of fact this involvement has proved beneficial at many levels: improved patient safety [7], increased user satisfaction [8], reduction is development costs while limiting redesign [9]-a finding contested by other authors [10] [11]-and increased likelihood of commercial success [2]. This phenomenon became an imperative in MDTD (Medical Device Technology Development) after international bodies amongst which the US Food and Drug Administration [12] and the European Union [10] [13] started requiring user participation as well as user-focused development of medical device technologies as regulatory requirements that would lead to licensing and subsequent commercialization of the MDTs in the USA and the EU.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Innovation and Involvement of End-Users in the Medical Device Technologies’ Design & Development Process: End-Users’ Perspectives

Hani¹,

Marcellis-Warin²

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Literature and Regulatory bodies growing interest in End-Users' implication in Medical Device Technologies (MDTs) development processes are a clear proof of the importance of this involvement and the positive impacts it can have on the development, implementation and use of MDTs, thus subsequent improvements in healthcare services' delivery. However, existing research has mainly been focused on the theoretical importance of this involvement, and the manufacturers' views and attitudes, with little attention focused on End-Users' concerns and thoughts concerning this process. The aim of this paper is to identify the perspectives of Nurses and Doctors as the best representatives of MDT End-Users, regarding their own involvement in MDT development processes.

show abstract

Guest editorial: public and user ‘involvement’ in the UK National Health Service

Cited by 58 publications

References 14 publications

Network 1000: Surveying the changing needs and lifestyles of 1000 visually impaired people — Indicative results from generative interviews

Network 1000: Surveying the changing needs and lifestyles of 1000 visually impaired people — Indicative results from generative interviews

Network 1000: the changing needs and circumstances of visually-impaired people: project overview

Open Innovation and Involvement of End-Users in the Medical Device Technologies’ Design & Development Process: End-Users’ Perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Guest editorial: public and user ‘involvement’ in the UK National Health Service

Cited by 58 publications

References 14 publications

Network 1000: Surveying the changing needs and lifestyles of 1000 visually impaired people — Indicative results from generative interviews

Network 1000: Surveying the changing needs and lifestyles of 1000 visually impaired people — Indicative results from generative interviews

Network 1000: the changing needs and circumstances of visually-impaired people: project overview

Open Innovation and Involvement of End-Users in the Medical Device Technologies’ Design &amp; Development Process: End-Users’ Perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Open Innovation and Involvement of End-Users in the Medical Device Technologies’ Design & Development Process: End-Users’ Perspectives