- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT06838689
Participatory Approaches to Qualitative Research (PAQ): Comparing Two Approaches to Patient, Public and Clinician Involvement in Qualitative Research (PAQ)
Participatory Approach to Qualitative Research (PAQ): Comparing Two Methods of Engaging Stakeholders in Qualitative Research
The goal of this trial is to compare two types of patient, public and clinician involvement (PPCI) in research: Consultative PPCI and Collaborative PPCI.
The study team will compare these methods of PPCI in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) in which PPCI participants will engage with research teams on one of three real qualitative research interview studies addressing topics: 1) pediatric mental health, 2) cancer screening and 3) serious illness. Qualitative interviews are conversations with people about their experiences and perspectives. In all three qualitative studies, PPCI participants will help us at every stage of the research, from design (making choices about how to set up the study) through dissemination (sharing findings).
The researchers do not know about any quantitative (numbers) evidence from RCTs about how well different PPCI approaches work. As far as the study team knows, this is the first RCT of PPCI approaches. Given this gap in knowledge, the research question is: How does a Consultative PPCI approach compare to a Collaborative PPCI approach in increasing engagement and partnership trust in research, particularly among historically underrepresented groups? The researchers' best guess (hypothesis), considering the information available, is that Collaborative PPCI will increase PPCI participant engagement, trust and the patient-centeredness of research more than Consultative PPCI.
Study Overview
Status
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
This stratified randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) is to test Consultative patient, public and clinician involvement (PPCI) in research against Collaborative PPCI in the context of three real-world qualitative research studies. Qualitative research methods can reveal insights into complex health phenomena, such as access to health services, clinician-patient communication, implementation research, and organizational culture and improvement. PPCI has also been acknowledged as indispensable in enhancing the validity, rigor and credibility of research.
The research team developed detailed guides for two approaches to PPCI throughout the lifetime of qualitative research projects, including 1) design, 2) data collection, 3) analysis and 4) dissemination. While there is a strong theoretical rationale that participatory research processes like Consultative PPCI may improve partner engagement more than consultative PPCI, evidence from experimental studies is lacking.
Given this gap, the research question is: How does a Consultative PPCI approach to involvement in research compared to a Collaborative PPCI approach in increasing engagement and partnership trust in research, particularly among historically underrepresented groups?
The study team hypothesizes Collaborative PPCI will result in higher partner-reported engagement, trust and patient-centeredness of research than Consultative PPCI.
Study Aims:
- To compare the effectiveness of Consultative PPCI versus Collaborative PPCI on partner engagement in research (primary outcome), partnership trust (secondary outcome).
- To use mixed methods to determine whether stakeholder engagement in research and partnership trust vary based on stakeholder characteristics.
- To evaluate the extent to which engagement and partnership trust are mediated by engagement experience and group dynamics.
The research team will conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test the relative effectiveness of these PPCI approaches across three real-world qualitative studies. Participants will be randomly assigned to Consultative or Collaborative PPCI using a stratified approach with three embedded qualitative studies as strata. The core function of Collaborative PPCI is to test a simple, collaborative partner engagement model, while the core function of Consultative PPCI is to test the traditional consultative partner engagement model. The researchers are are operationalizing Consultative PPCI with Community Advisory Boards (CAB) and Collaborative PPCI with a new approach called the Participatory Approach to Qualitative Research (PAQ). The study team selected an RCT with stratified randomization to evaluate the research question in the context of three diverse topic areas, to maintain separate Consultative and Collaborative study groups of reasonable size within each strata (n=10 for each study's CAB or PAQ group, for a total of 60 participants), and to ultimately increase generalizability of results. Following randomization, the researchers will evaluate for balance across groups in participant age, race, ethnicity, rurality and composite socioeconomic status (comprising education and income). The objectives, interventions and outcomes will be measured at the individual participant level. The RCT will be conducted over an 18-month period. The PAQ and CAB arms will have separate professional research staff facilitators, both experienced in CAB and PAQ facilitation; these facilitators will be involved in all three project strata. Prior to study start, the research team will standardize Consultative and Collaborative PPCI training.
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Catherine Saunders, Assistant Professor of Medicine, PhD, MPH
- Phone Number: 603-650-5402
- Email: Catherine.Hylas.Saunders@dartmouth.edu
Study Locations
-
-
New Hampshire
-
Hanover, New Hampshire, United States, 03755
- Recruiting
- Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth
-
Contact:
- Phone Number: 603-650-5402
-
Principal Investigator:
- Christine M Gunn, PhD
-
Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States, 03756
- Recruiting
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
-
Contact:
- Phone Number: 603-650-5402
-
Principal Investigator:
- JoAnna K Leyenaar, MD, PhD, MPH
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion criteria & Exclusion criteria across three sub-specialties:
Pediatric mental health
Inclusion:
- Adults aged ≥18 years
- Can communicate in English
- Able to take part in research activities via a computer or a smartphone
- Patients, care partners, clinicians, other healthcare professionals, teachers and school staff, health policy experts, and community members
- Has lived experience or professional expertise relating to pediatric mental health
Exclusion:
- Children <18 years
- Cannot communicate in English
- Adults unable to provide verbal consent
- Prisoners
- Unable to take part in research activities via a computer or a smartphone
Generalized cancer screening
Inclusion:
- Adults aged ≥21 years
- Can communicate in English
- Able to take part in research activities via a computer or a smartphone
- Patients, care partners, clinicians, other healthcare professionals, health policy experts, and community members
- Is eligible for population-based cancer screening tests (breast, prostate, cervical, colorectal cancer), or has lived experience or professional expertise relating to generalized cancer screening
Exclusion:
- Children <18 years
- Cannot communicate in English
- Adults unable to provide verbal consent
- Prisoners
- Unable to take part in research activities via a computer or a smartphone
Serious illness experience
Inclusion:
- Adults aged ≥18 years
- Can communicate in English
- Able to take part in research activities via a computer or a smartphone
- Patients, care partners, clinicians, other healthcare professionals, health policy experts, and community members
- Has lived experience or professional expertise relating to serious illness (defined as "a health condition that carries a high risk of mortality and either negatively impacts a person's daily functioning or quality of life or excessively strains his or her caregivers."
Exclusion:
- Children <18 years
- Cannot communicate in English
- Adults unable to provide verbal consent
- Prisoners
- Unable to take part in research activities via a computer or a smartphone
Note: We will not specifically exclude pregnant women, so they may be included incidentally.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Consultative PPCI Model via Community Advisory Boards (CAB)
Community Advisory Board: a consultative model of engagement where participants attend 4 quarterly meetings with shared leadership between participants and research team.
|
Participatory Approaches to Qualitative Research (PAQ): Comparing Two Approaches to Patient, Public and Clinician Involvement (PPCI) in Qualitative Research: PAQ and CAB (Community Advisory Boards)
Other Names:
|
|
Experimental: Collaborative PPCI Model via the Participatory Approach to Qualitative
Participatory Approach to Qualitative Research: a collaborative model of engagement with 4 idea coproduction sessions and a close partnership with study staff.
|
Participatory Approaches to Qualitative Research (PAQ): Comparing Two Approaches to Patient, Public and Clinician Involvement (PPCI) in Qualitative Research: PAQ and CAB (Community Advisory Boards)
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Patient Engagement in Research scale (PEIRS-22)
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Engagement in research, measured using the Patient Engagement in Research scale (PEIRS-22).
Total score is 22-110, with higher scores reflecting greater engagement in research.
|
18 months
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST)
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Partnership Trust, measured using the "build and maintain trust in the partnership" scale of the Research Engagement Survey Tool (REST).
Component scores are calculated as means, with four being the best possible score.
|
18 months
|
|
Patient and Public Involvement in Research Assessment Survey
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Research patient-centeredness, measured using the Patient and Public Involvement in Research Assessment Survey (PAS).
Possible scores range from 0-80, with higher scores equating to higher patient-centeredness.
|
18 months
|
|
Person-Centeredness of Research Scale
Time Frame: 18 months
|
Research patient centeredness, measured using the Person-Centeredness of Research Scale.
Possible scores range from -14 to +14, with higher scores representing more patient-centered research.
|
18 months
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Publications and helpful links
Helpful Links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- PAQ_STUDY02002675_RCT
- SOE-2023C3-25572 (Other Grant/Funding Number: PCORI)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Cancer Screening
-
Pamukkale UniversityThe Scientific and Technological Research Council of TurkeyActive, not recruitingCancer Screening | Men's Health ScreeningTurkey (Türkiye)
-
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)National Cancer Institute (NCI); Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers and other collaboratorsNot yet recruitingTobacco Cessation | Cervical Cancer Screening | Breast Cancer Screening | Colon Cancer Screening
-
Lanxi Hospital of Traditional Chinese MedicineZhejiang Cancer Hospital; Zhejiang Chinese Medical UniversityWithdrawn
-
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterNational Cancer Institute (NCI)Completed
-
Johns Hopkins UniversityState of MarylandCompleted
-
University of South DakotaNot yet recruitingCervical Cancer ScreeningUnited States
-
The Cleveland ClinicRecruitingCervical Cancer ScreeningEl Salvador
-
University Hospital, CaenCentre Régional de Coordination du Dépistage des Cancers - Centre Val de... and other collaboratorsNot yet recruiting
-
The University of Hong KongInnovation and Technology Commission, Hong Kong; Phase Scientific International...Not yet recruitingCervical Cancer ScreeningHong Kong
-
Fudan UniversityRecruiting
Clinical Trials on Comparison of two standard of care regimens
-
University of Alabama at BirminghamTerminatedMycoplasma Genitalium InfectionUnited States
-
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de BesanconTerminated
-
San Gerardo HospitalCompletedInfant, Very Low Birth Weight | Infant Malnutrition | Feeding Disorder of Infancy or Early Childhood | Splanchnic Oximetry | Splanchnic OxygenationItaly
-
Cairo UniversityUnknown
-
Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement...U.S. Army Medical Research and Development CommandTerminatedCombat Disorders | Stress Disorders | Traumatic Stress DisordersUnited States
-
Multan Medical And Dental CollegeCompleted
-
University Hospital, MotolCompletedCoagulation Defect; Bleeding
-
Shirley Ryan AbilityLabJohns Hopkins UniversityNot yet recruitingCervical Spinal Cord Injury | Acute Stroke
-
University Health Network, TorontoRecruitingSquamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and NeckCanada
-
Indiana UniversityCompleted