Why we should conduct research in collaboration with people who use alcohol and other drugs

Addiction

Volumn 112, Issue 12, 2017, Pages 2084-2085

  Neale, Joanne ^a,b   Bouteloup, Annabel ^b   Getty, Mel ^b   Hogan, Cassandra ^b   Lennon, Paul ^b   Mc Cusker, Martin ^b   Strang, John ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b c/o Aurora Project ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Alcohol and other drugs; collaborative research; patient and public involvement; research; service user involvement; user led research

Indexed keywords

COOPERATION; DRINKING BEHAVIOR; DRUG DEPENDENCE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; RESEARCH SUBJECT;

ALCOHOL DRINKING; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; SUBSTANCE-RELATED DISORDERS;

EID: 85030638432     PISSN: 09652140     EISSN: 13600443     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/add.14015     Document Type: Editorial

References (16)

1. Rose D. The contemporary state of service-user-led research. Lancet Psychiatry 2015; 2: 959–960.
2. Involve. What is public involvement in research? National Institute for Health Research; 2017. Available at: http://www.invo.org.uk/find-out-more/what-is-public-involvement-in-research-2/ (accessed 12 September 2017) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/6tQQ557Zo).
3. Trivedi P., Wykes T. From passive subjects to equal partners: qualitative review of user involvement in research. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 181: 468–472.
4. Arnstein S. R. A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 1969; 35: 216–224.
5. Poulton B. C. User involvement in identifying health needs and shaping and evaluating services: is it being realised? J Adv Nurs 1999; 30: 1289–1296.
6. Elliott E., Watson A., Harries U. Harnessing expertise: involving peer interviewers in qualitative research with hard-to-reach populations. Health Expect 2002; 5: 172–178.
7. Angell K. L., Kreshka M. A., McCoy R., Donnelly P., Turner-Cobb J. M., Graddy K. et al. Psychosocial intervention for rural women with breast cancer. J Gen Intern Med 2003; 18: 499–507.
8. Hewlett S., Cockshott Z., Byron M., Kitchen K., Tipler S., Pope D. et al. Patients’ perceptions of fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: overwhelming, uncontrollable, ignored. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 53: 697–702.
9. Gooberman-Hill R., Horwood J., Calnan M. Citizens’ juries in planning research priorities: process, engagement and outcome. Health Expect 2008; 11: 272–281.
10. Oliver S., Armes D. G., Gyte G. Public involvement in setting a national research agenda: a mixed methods evaluation. Patient 2009; 2: 179–190.
11. Boote J., Baird W., Sutton A. Public involvement in the design and conduct of clinical trials: a review. Int J Interdiscip Soc Sci 2011; 5: 91–111.
12. Fudge N., Wolfe C., McKevitt C. Assessing the promise of user involvement in health service development: ethnographic study. BMJ 2008; 336: 313.
13. Ward P. R., Thompson J., Barber R., Armitage C. J., Boote J. D., Cooper C. L. et al. Critical perspectives on ‘consumer involvement’ in health research: epistemological dissonance and the know-do gap. J Sociol 2010; 46: 63–82.
14. Gibson A., Britten N., Lynch J. Theoretical directions for an emancipatory concept of patient and public involvement. Health 2012; 16: 531–547.
15. Goodare H., Lockward S. Involving patients in clinical research. BMJ 1999; 319: 724–725.
16. School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR). Patient and public involvement in research. The University of Sheffield, School of Health and Related Research, PPI; 2017. Available at: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/scharr/ppi (accessed 12 September 2017) (Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/6tQQHkUgV).