Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36050697›Full record

ArticleHealth research policy and systems2022

User involvement in ageing and health research: a survey of researchers' and older adults' perspectives.

Maya Kylén, Björn Slaug, Oskar Jonsson, Susanne Iwarsson, Steven M Schmidt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health research policy and systems, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Theoretical Models of Collaborative Partnerships in Arts-Health Care Practices for Older Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maya KylénDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, HSC Margaretavägen 1 B, 22240, Lund, Sweden. maya.kylen@med.lu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2887-3674
Björn SlaugDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, HSC Margaretavägen 1 B, 22240, Lund, Sweden.
Oskar JonssonDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, HSC Margaretavägen 1 B, 22240, Lund, Sweden.
Susanne IwarssonDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, HSC Margaretavägen 1 B, 22240, Lund, Sweden.
Steven M SchmidtDepartment of Health Sciences, Lund University, HSC Margaretavägen 1 B, 22240, Lund, Sweden.
Lund University · SE

Funding

Forskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och Välfärd 2016-07090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUser involvement in research has rapidly increased and is often a precondition to obtain research funding. Benefits such as effectiveness and increased relevance of research are described in the literature, but the evidence to support this is weak. Little is known about ageing and health researchers' experiences and perspectives towards user involvement in research, and their attitudes towards user involvement compared to the attitudes of the users involved are largely unknown. To examine researchers' experiences and perspectives of user involvement in research on ageing and health, and to compare their attitudes towards user involvement to the attitudes of older adults in the general population.

methodsA panel study survey was used to elicit responses from researchers in ageing and health as well as from older adults (aged 60 years and older). The researcher sample (N = 64) completed the survey online, while the older adult sample (N = 881) could choose among three different options to complete the survey (online, paper format, telephone). A professional survey company collected the data. Descriptive statistics, exploratory comparisons and descriptive qualitative content analysis were used to analyse the data.

resultsMore than half (58%) of the researchers had previous experience of involving different categories of users in a wide range of research activities. The most frequent motivation for involving users was to ensure that the research produced is relevant to the target population. A majority (86%) reported benefits, and more than half (59%) described challenges. Differences in attitudes were found between researchers and older adults in the general population.

conclusionsAgeing and health researchers involve users in their research to improve quality and ensure relevance, but there is no consensus among them whether users should be involved in publicly funded research. While several challenges were identified, training, institutional support and resources from funders could alleviate many of these. Findings reveal significant differences in attitudes between older adults in the general population and researchers. Further research with comparable larger samples is needed to confirm and understand the possible consequences such controversy might have and how to solve them. IRRID (International Registered Report Identifier): RR2-10.2196/17759.

Indexed as

MotivationResearch PersonnelAgedAgingHumansMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesAgeing and health researchPatient and public involvementUser involvement

Identifiers

PMID36050697
PMCPMC9438331
OpenAlexW4294024701

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.