Browsing by Author "Guise, Jeanne-Marie"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Protocol for the development of guidance for stakeholder engagement in health and healthcare guideline development and implementation
    (BMC, 2020-02-01) Petkovic, Jennifer; Riddle, Alison; Akl, Elie A.; Khabsa, Joanne; Lytvyn, Lyubov; Atwere, Pearl; Campbell, Pauline; Chalkidou, Kalipso; Chang, Stephanie M.; Crowe, Sally; Dans, Leonila; Jardali, Fadi El; Ghersi, Davina; Graham, Ian D.; Grant, Sean; Greer-Smith, Regina; Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Hazlewood, Glen; Janet, Janet; Katikireddi, S. Vittal; Langlois, Etienne V.; Lyddiatt, Anne; Maxwell, Lara; Morley, Richard; Mustafa, Reem A.; Nonino, Francesco; Pardo, Jordi Pardo; Pollock, Alex; Kevin, Kevin; Riva, John; Schünemann, Holger; Simeon, Rosiane; Smith, Maureen; Stein, Airton T.; Synnot, Anneliese; Tufte, Janice; White, Howard; Welch, Vivian; Concannon, Thomas W.; Tugwell, Peter; Social and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health
    Stakeholder engagement has become widely accepted as a necessary component of guideline development and implementation. While frameworks for developing guidelines express the need for those potentially affected by guideline recommendations to be involved in their development, there is a lack of consensus on how this should be done in practice. Further, there is a lack of guidance on how to equitably and meaningfully engage multiple stakeholders. We aim to develop guidance for the meaningful and equitable engagement of multiple stakeholders in guideline development and implementation. METHODS: This will be a multi-stage project. The first stage is to conduct a series of four systematic reviews. These will (1) describe existing guidance and methods for stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation, (2) characterize barriers and facilitators to stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation, (3) explore the impact of stakeholder engagement on guideline development and implementation, and (4) identify issues related to conflicts of interest when engaging multiple stakeholders in guideline development and implementation. DISCUSSION: We will collaborate with our multiple and diverse stakeholders to develop guidance for multi-stakeholder engagement in guideline development and implementation. We will use the results of the systematic reviews to develop a candidate list of draft guidance recommendations and will seek broad feedback on the draft guidance via an online survey of guideline developers and external stakeholders. An invited group of representatives from all stakeholder groups will discuss the results of the survey at a consensus meeting which will inform the development of the final guidance papers. Our overall goal is to improve the development of guidelines through meaningful and equitable multi-stakeholder engagement, and subsequently to improve health outcomes and reduce inequities in health.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Training the next generation of learning health system scientists
    (Wiley, 2022-09-10) Lozano, Paula M.; Lane-Fall, Meghan; Franklin, Patricia D.; Rothman, Russell L.; Gonzales, Ralph; Ong, Michael K.; Gould, Michael K.; Beebe, Timothy J.; Roumie, Christianne L.; Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Enders, Felicity T.; Forrest, Christopher B.; Mendonca, Eneida A.; Starrels, Joanna L.; Sarkar, Urmimala; Savitz, Lucy A.; Moon, JeanHee; Linzer, Mark; Ralston, James D.; Chelsey, Francis D., Jr.; Pediatrics, School of Medicine
    Introduction: The learning health system (LHS) aligns science, informatics, incentives, stakeholders, and culture for continuous improvement and innovation. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute designed a K12 initiative to grow the number of LHS scientists. We describe approaches developed by 11 funded centers of excellence (COEs) to promote partnerships between scholars and health system leaders and to provide mentored research training. Methods: Since 2018, the COEs have enlisted faculty, secured institutional resources, partnered with health systems, developed and implemented curricula, recruited scholars, and provided mentored training. Program directors for each COE provided descriptive data on program context, scholar characteristics, stakeholder engagement, scholar experiences with health system partnerships, roles following program completion, and key training challenges. Results: To date, the 11 COEs have partnered with health systems to train 110 scholars. Nine (82%) programs partner with a Veterans Affairs health system and 9 (82%) partner with safety net providers. Clinically trained scholars (n = 87; 79%) include 70 physicians and 17 scholars in other clinical disciplines. Non-clinicians (n = 29; 26%) represent diverse fields, dominated by population health sciences. Stakeholder engagement helps scholars understand health system and patient/family needs and priorities, enabling opportunities to conduct embedded research, improve outcomes, and grow skills in translating research methods and findings into practice. Challenges include supporting scholars through roadblocks that threaten to derail projects during their limited program time, ranging from delays in access to data to COVID-19-related impediments and shifts in organizational priorities. Conclusions: Four years into this novel training program, there is evidence of scholars' accomplishments, both in traditional academic terms and in terms of moving along career trajectories that hold the potential to lead and accelerate transformational health system change. Future LHS training efforts should focus on sustainability, including organizational support for scholar activities.