Next Article in Journal
Spatial-Temporal Coupling Analysis of the Coordination between Urbanization and Water Ecosystem in the Yangtze River Economic Belt
Next Article in Special Issue
Progreso en Salud: Findings from Two Adapted Social Network HIV Risk Reduction Interventions for Latina Seasonal Workers
Previous Article in Journal
Why Do Patients Move from Online Health Platforms to Hospitals? The Perspectives of Fairness Theory and Brand Extension Theory
Previous Article in Special Issue
Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the Children’s Vitality-Relaxation Scale
Article

Co-producing Progression Criteria for Feasibility Studies: A Partnership between Patient Contributors, Clinicians and Researchers

1
Department of Respiratory Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
2
John Walls Renal Unit, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester LE1 5WW, UK
3
Leicester Kidney Lifestyle Haemodialysis Patient Involvement Group, University of Leicester and University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester LE1 5WW, UK
4
Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
5
Aging Related Research Patient and Public Involvement Group, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
6
National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Loughborough University, Loughborough LE11 3TU, UK
7
Department of Cardiovascular Science, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK
8
Department of Respiratory Medicine, Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester LE1 5WW, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
joint senior authors.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(19), 3756; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16193756
Received: 14 August 2019 / Revised: 13 September 2019 / Accepted: 29 September 2019 / Published: 6 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Complex Interventions for Public Health Improvement)
There is a lack of guidance for developing progression criteria (PC) within feasibility studies. We describe a process for co-producing PC for an ongoing feasibility study. Patient contributors, clinicians and researchers participated in discussions facilitated using the modified Nominal Group Technique (NGT). Stage one involved individual discussion groups used to develop and rank PC for aspects of the trial key to feasibility. A second stage involving representatives from each of the individual groups then discussed and ranked these PC. The highest ranking PC became the criteria used. At each stage all members were provided with a brief education session to aid understanding and decision-making. Fifty members (15 (29%) patients, 13 (25%) researchers and 24 (46%) clinicians) were involved in eight initial groups, and eight (two (25%) patients, five (62%) clinicians, one (13%) researcher) in one final group. PC relating to eligibility, recruitment, intervention and outcome acceptability and loss to follow-up were co-produced. Groups highlighted numerous means of adapting intervention and trial procedures should ‘change’ criteria be met. Modified NGT enabled the equal inclusion of patients, clinician and researcher in the co-production of PC. The structure and processes provided a transparent mechanism for setting PC that could be replicated in other feasibility studies. View Full-Text
Keywords: feasibility; progression criteria; co-production; patient involvement; consensus; nominal group technique feasibility; progression criteria; co-production; patient involvement; consensus; nominal group technique
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Young, H.M.L.; Goodliffe, S.; Madhani, M.; Phelps, K.; Regen, E.; Locke, A.; Burton, J.O.; Singh, S.J.; Smith, A.C.; Conroy, S. Co-producing Progression Criteria for Feasibility Studies: A Partnership between Patient Contributors, Clinicians and Researchers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3756. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16193756

AMA Style

Young HML, Goodliffe S, Madhani M, Phelps K, Regen E, Locke A, Burton JO, Singh SJ, Smith AC, Conroy S. Co-producing Progression Criteria for Feasibility Studies: A Partnership between Patient Contributors, Clinicians and Researchers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(19):3756. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16193756

Chicago/Turabian Style

Young, Hannah M.L., Samantha Goodliffe, Meeta Madhani, Kay Phelps, Emma Regen, Anthony Locke, James O. Burton, Sally J. Singh, Alice C. Smith, and Simon Conroy. 2019. "Co-producing Progression Criteria for Feasibility Studies: A Partnership between Patient Contributors, Clinicians and Researchers" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 19: 3756. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph16193756

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop