» Articles » PMID: 39609924

"I Just Don't Know Enough": Australian Perspectives on Community Involvement in Health and Medical Research

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2024 Nov 29
PMID 39609924
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: There is increasing global support from governments and other funding bodies for community involvement in research, alongside a scientific and moral imperative for responsible and ethical research practice. Ninety per cent of Australian patient-led organisations in rare diseases have clearly articulated research priorities, indicating a desire among people affected by disease to be involved in research that impacts their communities. Philanthropic research, which is likely to have predominantly community-minded priorities, is worth over AU$1 billion annually and increased more than 100% between 2007 and 2017.

Aims: This research aimed to understand public perspectives on community involvement in health-related research activities, and to inform the development of guidelines for genomic researchers to improve this involvement.

Methods: A 37-question survey was completed by 1,156 members of the Australian public via Dynata. The survey was co-designed by the Involve Australia Working Group of community members within Australian Genomics. Results from 1156 responses were analysed.

Results: Key themes emerging from the survey data that impact potential involvement were low community confidence to contribute, a limited understanding of community involvement, roles and recognition, trust and governance of data, perceived trustworthiness of research funders, and factors related to time and personal resources. A variety of motivations for involvement were also stated.

Conclusion: Members of the Australian public are interested in research involvement; however the differences between involvement and participation are poorly understood and a variety of barriers still exist. Researchers must actively reach out into communities and offer opportunities to engage with research and identify community priorities.

References
1.
Maguire K, Britten N . "How can anybody be representative for those kind of people?" Forms of patient representation in health research, and why it is always contestable. Soc Sci Med. 2017; 183:62-69. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.04.049. View

2.
Partridge N, Scadding J . The James Lind Alliance: patients and clinicians should jointly identify their priorities for clinical trials. Lancet. 2004; 364(9449):1923-4. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17494-1. View

3.
Sukhov A, Burrall B, Maverakis E . The history of open access medical publishing: a comprehensive review. Dermatol Online J. 2017; 22(9). View

4.
Day S, Rennie S, Luo D, Tucker J . Open to the public: paywalls and the public rationale for open access medical research publishing. Res Involv Engagem. 2020; 6:8. PMC: 7048123. DOI: 10.1186/s40900-020-0182-y. View

5.
Burton H, Adams M, Bunton R, Schroder-Back P . Developing stakeholder involvement for introducing public health genomics into public policy. Public Health Genomics. 2008; 12(1):11-9. DOI: 10.1159/000153426. View