Patients and health professionals working together to improve clinical research: Where are we going?

European Journal of Cancer

Volumn 42, Issue 15, 2006, Pages 2454-2458

  Thornton, Hazel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Independent facilitation in collaborative research; Patient involvement in clinical research; Relevant hypotheses and endpoints; Research governance; Semantic interoperability

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONALISM;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIALS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; FEMALE; HORMONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PROFESSIONAL-PATIENT RELATIONS;

EID: 33748953135     PISSN: 09598049     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2006.05.022     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Catherine Beckman. Through the lens of a patient. bmj.com. http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters?lookup=by_date&days=1#129843; 2006 [accessed 15.03.06].
2. Doug Fridsma. CaBIG and BRIDG. Presentation at NCRI informatics initiative 23rd and 24th January 2006. See: http://www.cancerinformatics.org.uk/workshops.htm#dsct.
3. Messai R. A breast cancer terminology for lay people. Speaker proffered paper Friday 24th March 2006. In: Europa donna workshop: 'Should advocates be involved in the design of clinical trials?' 5th European Breast Cancer Conference, Nice, France.
4. Wright D., Corner J., Hopkinson J., and Foster C. Listening to the views of people affected by cancer about cancer research: an example of participatory research in setting the cancer agenda. Health Expect 9 (2006) 3-12
5. Thornton H., Edwards A., and Elwyn G. Evolving the multiple rôles of 'patients' in healthcare research: reflections after involvement in a trial of shared decision-making. Health Expect 6 3 (2003) 189-197
6. Roger Wilson. Email to NCRN Consumers list group. 11 January 2006 11.19 a.m.
7. Report: Doctors in society. Medical professionalism in a changing world. Royal College of Physicians. London; 2005.
8. http://www.pickereurope.org/pcp/rapidresponse.php?article=1&id=23. Janet Askham, Alison Chisholm. Patient-centred medical professionalism: towards an agenda for research and action. Picker Institute. March 2006.
9. Baum, Michael. Speaking at the UKCCCR National Breast Cancer Trials Meeting in London in 1996.
10. Evans I., Thornton H., and Chalmers I. Testing treatment: better research for better healthcare (2006), The British Library
11. Minerva, BMJ 2000;320:724 [Fertility Sterility 2000;73:292-9].
12. National Cancer Research Network - Breast Cancer Trials Report. November 2002.
13. NHS Research and Development (Cancer). Project No. NCP/D18. 1995.
14. Thornton H. Identifying patients' and clinicians' priorities in cancer clinical trials. In: Rawlings S.M., and Littlejohns P. (Eds). Delivering quality in the NHS 2005 (2005), Radcliffe Publishing, Oxford. 1 85775 742 4
15. Booklet written y a committee of patients and healthcare professionals working together under the chairmanship of Dr. Jane Maher. Breast Cancer and Hormones and HRT. Cancer Support and Information. Lynda Jackson Macmillan Centre, Mount Vernon Hospital; May 1998.
16. Marsden J., and Bradburn J. Patient and clinician collaboration in the design of a national randomised breast cancer trial. Health Expect 7 1 (2004) 6-17 [See also: Thornton H. Letter to the Editor. Reporting dates is necessary to establish historical perspective - and validity of references. Health Expectations. 2004;7:268]
17. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Atwell C, et al. Shared decision making and risk communication in general practice - a study incorporating systematic literature reviews, psychometric evaluation of outcome measures, and quantitative, qualitative and health economic analysis of a cluster randomised trial of professional skill development. Report to 'Health in Partnership' programme, UK Department of Health. http://www.healthinpartnership.org/studies/edwards.html. Cardiff: Department of General Practice, University of Wales College of Medicine; 2002.
18. Thornton H., and Dixon-Woods M. Recruitment of women into trials. Lancet 359 (2002) 164
19. House of Commons Health Select Committee Third Report. July 1995. HMSO. p.lvi.para 205.
20. McNamee, David. Lancet Editorial: Public's perception of RCTs. 1998;351:772.
21. Thornton H. Today's patient: passive or involved?. Supplement to The Lancet 2000 354 (1999) siv48
22. Hanley B., Truesdale A., King A., Elbourne D., and Chalmers I. Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey. BMJ 322 (2001) 519-523
23. Oliver S., Clarke-Jones L., Rees R., et al. Involving consumers in research and development agenda setting for the NHS: developing an evidence-based approach. Health Technol Assess 8 15 (2004)
24. Telford R., Boote J.D., and Cooper C.L. What does it mean to involve consumers successfully in NHS research? A consensus study. Health Expect 7 (2004) 209-220
25. Editorial. Bastian H. Consumer and researcher collaboration in trials: filling the gaps. Clinical Trials 2 (2005) 3-4
26. Review: Crawford M, Rutter D, Thelwell S. User involvement in change management: a review of the literature. 2003. NCC SDO (National Co-ordinating Centre Service Delivery and Organisation) (And other SDO 'user involvement' reports on SDO website www.sdo.lshtm.ac.uk.
27. Refractor. 'Insiders' and 'outsiders' in research collaborations? Lancet 2000;356:1038.
28. Tannock IF. The role of the clinical/principal investigator. Presented paper Friday 24th March 2006. In: Europa Donna workshop: 'Should advocates be involved in the design of clinical trials?' 5th European Breast Cancer Conference, Nice, France.
29. NHS Consumers in Research: INVOLVE. www.invo.org.uk See: Database of research projects.
30. The James Lind Alliance. www.lindalliance.org.
31. Kushner R. Breast cancer: a personal history and an investigative report (1975), Harcourt Brace Jovanovitch, New York
32. Lerner B.H. The breast cancer wars: hope, fear, and the pursuit of a cure in twentieth-century America (2003), Oxford University Press, New York
33. DoH NHS Health Technology Assessment programme. Annual Report 2005.Feb 2006. www.hta.ac.uk/annualreport.
34. Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Young B, Jones D, Sutton A. Integrative approaches to qualitative and quantitative evidence. NHS HDA Report.
35. Donovan J., Mills N., Brindle L., et al. Improving the design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: the ProtecT study. BMJ 325 (2002)
36. Koops L., and Lindley R. Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke: consumer involvement in design of new randomised controlled trials. BMJ 325 (2002) 415-417
37. The Cochrane Library. www.thecochranelibrary.com.
38. Editor's choice. My last choice. BMJ 2004;329. (Researchers drowning in bureaucracy.).
39. Akseli H., and Pirkko-Liisa K.-L. Harmful impact of EU clinical trials directive. BMJ 332 (2006) 501-502 [And responses in BMJ 18th March 2006]
40. Elwyn G., Seagrove A., Thorne K., and Cheung W.Y. Ethics and research governance in a multicentre study: add 150 days to your study protocol. BMJ 330 (2005) 847
41. Galbraith N., Hawley C., and De-Souza V. Research governance approval is putting people off research. BMJ 332 (2006) 238
42. Julia Miller, et al. Honorary Research Contracts for Researchers working in Greater Manchester: The Research Passport. NHS April 2005 www.gmsha.nhs.uk/research/research_passport2005.pd.
43. Thornton H. Whose idea is it?. BMJ 332 (2006) 238
44. Stephen Epstein S. Impure science. Aids, activism and the politics of knowledge (1996), University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles and London p. 331-2