Engaging citizens living in vulnerable circumstances in research: a narrative review using a systematic search.

Although public engagement in research is increasingly popular, the involvement of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances is rarely realized. This narrative review aims to describe and critically analyse concerns and corresponding strategies, tools, and methods that could support the inclusion of these citizens in health research. The 40 studies that are included were thematically analysed using the socioecological model. Concerns originate most often on the intrapersonal level of the socioecological model, but concerns were also identified at institutional, community, and policy levels. It is thought-provoking that there is a lack of attention for the research and policy structure in which engagement practices are designed, implemented and evaluated. More research is needed to explore how these cultures could be changed in a way that promotes rather than restrains the engagement of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances in research and policymaking.

Unfortunately, citizens living in vulnerable circumstances are seldom engaged in research or policymaking. Think of, citizens living in poverty, those with an ethnic minority background or citizens with mental health issues are often excluded. Their involvement is, however, crucial to prevent growing (health) inequalities. To support the engagement of people living in vulnerable circumstances we conducted a literature review. We looked for strategies, tools, and methods that could support the inclusion of these citizens in research or policymaking. In total, 40 studies were identified and analysed. The main finding is that strategies tools, and methods are always context depended. Researchers should always ask: What works for whom in which context? We, therefore, stress the importance of close collaboration with experienced owners and community based organisations from the start. Also, more attention should be paid to how engagement practices are designed, implemented and evaluated. Think of, strict deadlines which limit the time to build trust. Or low budgets that limit the options to create the right preconditions, think of recruitment and data collection in multiple languages. To make sure that not only the 'usual suspects' but also citizens living in vulnerable circumstance will be engaged attention is needed from advocacy groups, research funders and researchers. All these actors need to reflect more often on the question what they can do to change the current research and policymaking culture in such a way that it will support the engagement of citizens living in vulnerable circumstances.

Optimising Multi-stakeholder Practices in Patient Engagement: A Gap Analysis to Enable Focused Evolution of Patient Engagement in the Development and Lifecycle Management of Medicines.

BACKGROUND: The PARADIGM consortium aimed to make patient engagement in the development and lifecycle management of medicines easier and more effective for all, with the development of new tools that fulfil robustly defined gaps where engagement is suboptimal. AIMS: To generate an inventory of gaps in patient engagement practices and process from existing global examples. METHODS: A large set of criteria for effective patient engagement previously defined via a multi-stakeholder Delphi method, were mapped under fourteen overarching themes. A gap analysis was then performed by twenty-seven reviewers against the resulting forty-six mapped criteria, on a sample of seventy initiatives from global databases. RESULTS: An inventory of gaps was identified including contextual information as to why the gaps exist. Our work identified general patterns where patient engagement was suboptimal-defined as; fragmented reporting and dissemination of patient engagement activities, and the fundamental principles defined in frameworks or guidance being poorly adhered to in actual practice. Specific gaps were identified for sixteen criteria. Additionally, it was also common to observe primary aspects of a process were addressed for a given criteria (i.e. training for roles and responsibilities) but a secondary context element was lacking (i.e. making training material accessible/understandable/meaningful to all participants). CONCLUSION: The results show that the evolution towards meaningful and systematic patient engagement is occurring, yet more importantly they provide clear directional insights to help enhance collaborative practices and co-design solutions. This targeted impact to catalyse a needs-oriented health system that integrates patient engagement at its core is essential.

Empowering Patients and Health Professionals to Address Sexual Health in the Context of Anorectal Malformations and Hirschsprung's Disease.

The aim of this study is to develop a tool that is aligned with patients' and health professionals' needs to address sexual health in the context of anorectal malformations and Hirschsprung's disease. A multiphased participatory action-research was conducted. First, an inventory of needs was made through interviews (11 patients, 11 professionals), three online focus groups (4 patients, 20 professionals), and a questionnaire (38 patients). Subsequently, four cocreation sessions with in total four patients and nine professionals were organized to translate the needs into a tool (in the form of a website). The websites' functionality was assessed via a questionnaire (n = 34). The website, directed to patients, their parents, and professionals, stimulates awareness, fills knowledge gaps, and shows possibilities for support. The website is expected to change restrictive attitudes toward sexual health and improve the legitimization of the topic needed for the allocation of resources and sexologists' involvement in current care pathways.

Barriers to innovation in human rabies prophylaxis and treatment: A causal analysis of insights from key opinion leaders and literature.

Rabies is an essentially 100% fatal, zoonotic disease, caused by Lyssaviruses. Currently, the disease is vaccine-preventable with pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP and PEP). Still, rabies virus is estimated to cause up to 60,000 human deaths annually, of which the vast majority occurs in rural Asia and Africa, due to the inaccessibility of prophylaxis and non-existence of treatment. Despite these unmet clinical needs, rabies control mainly focuses on the sylvatic reservoir and drug innovation receives relatively little attention compared to other neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). As such, the lag of innovation in human rabies prophylaxis and treatment cannot be explained by limited return on investment alone. Strategies countering rabies-specific innovation barriers are important for the acceleration of innovation in human rabies prophylaxis and treatment. Barriers throughout society, science, business development and market domains were identified through literature review and 23 semi-structured interviews with key opinion leaders worldwide. A subsequent root cause analysis revealed causal relations between innovation barriers and a limited set of root causes. Finally, prioritization by experts indicated their relative importance. Root causes, which are fundamental to barriers, were aggregated into four types: market and commercial, stakeholder collaboration, public health and awareness, and disease trajectory. These were found in all domains of the innovation process and thus are relevant for all stakeholders. This study identifies barriers that were not previously described in this specific context, for example the competition for funding between medical and veterinary approaches. The results stress the existence of barriers beyond the limited return on investment and thereby explain why innovation in human rabies medication is lagging behind NTDs with a lower burden of disease. A re-orientation on the full spectrum of barriers that hinder innovation in rabies prophylaxis and treatment is necessary to meet unmet societal and medical needs.