46 research outputs found
Balancing benefits and risks in lung cancer therapies:patient preferences for lung cancer treatment alternatives
Maternal effects and the plasticity of dispersal distance in the two-spotted spider mite
Density and genetic relatedness increase dispersal distance in a subsocial organism
Although dispersal distance plays a major role in determining whether organisms will reach new habitats, empirical data on the environmental factors that affect dispersal distance are lacking. Population density and kin competition are two factors theorised to increase dispersal distance. Using the two-spotted spider mite as a model species, we altered these two environmental conditions and measured the mean dispersal distance of individuals, as well as other attributes of the dispersal kernel. We find that both density and relatedness in the release patch increase dispersal distance. Relatedness, but not density, changes the shape of the dispersal kernel towards a more skewed and leptokurtic shape including a longer 'fat-tail'. This is the first experimental demonstration that kin competition can shape the whole distribution of dispersal distances in a population, and thus affect the geographical spread of dispersal phenotypes
Patients as research partners in preference studies: learnings from IMI-PREFER
Plain English summary Research about patients’ preferences for medicinal products and treatments is growing. Such research could be improved if patients were involved as ‘research partners,’ that is, as active members of the study team itself. To date, however, little is known about the actual experience of involving patients as partners in such research. This paper presents learnings from involving patients as partners in 8 case studies conducted as part of IMI-PREFER, a big, European-based project which aimed to develop recommendations about how to conduct preference research. Involving patients as partners led to improvements in the: (1) quality of the research and research process; (2) recruitment of participants; (3) content and design of patient-facing informational materials; and, (4) how and what study results were shared with patient communities. Our findings showed that it is important to plan for patient partners’ involvement early on in the design of the preference study so as to ensure that they are fully integrated into the research team and their opportunity to contribute to all stages of the research is optimized. Such planning should address how patient partners will be paid, what their role responsibilities will include, how and when they will be trained and educated, and how they will be supported throughout the course of the study. Having a clearly stated purpose for involving patients as research partners, selecting patient partners who have had prior research experience and relationships with the researchers, and having multiple patient partners on the study team are all also helpful in supporting successful patient involvement. We need more people to share their experiences with involving patient partners in preference research so that we can continue to improve how this is done
Opportunities and challenges of web-based and remotely administered surveys for patient preference studies in a vulnerable population
The application of web-based and remotely administered surveys is becoming increasingly popular due to the fact that it offers numerous advantages over traditional paper-based or computer-based surveys completed in the presence of the researcher. However, it is unclear whether complex preference elicitation tasks administered online in highly vulnerable patient populations are also feasible. This commentary discusses opportunities and challenges of conducting quantitative patient preference studies in lung cancer patients using web-based modes of data collection. We refer to our recent experience in the context of the Patient Preference in Benefit-Risk Assessments during the Drug Life Cycle (PREFER) project. Among the main advantages were the possibility of reaching a wider and geogra-phically distant population in a shorter timeframe while reducing the financial costs of testing, the greater flexibility offered and the reduced burden on the patients. Some limitations were also identified and should be the object of further research, including the potential lack of inclusiveness of the research, the lack of control over who is completing the survey, a poor comprehension of the study material, and ultimately a lower level of engagement with the study. Despite these limitations, experience from the PREFER project suggests that online quantitative methods for data collection may provide a valuable method to explore preferences in vulnerable patient populations beyond the COVID-19 pandemic