Link to the University of Pittsburgh Homepage
Link to the University Library System Homepage Link to the Contact Us Form

Using a deliberative forum for engaging health system and health plan leaders to prioritize research topics.

McTigue, Kathleen M. (2018) Using a deliberative forum for engaging health system and health plan leaders to prioritize research topics. European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare, 6 (2). pp. 228-236. ISSN 2052-5656

Download (212kB) | Preview


Background: Including stakeholders in the process and outcomes of comparative effectiveness research (CER) can help ensure that research questions are relevant and findings are communicated to individuals who need them for decision-making. Yet limited strategies are available to assist researchers with stakeholder engagement. While health system leaders’ perspectives are increasingly recognized as valuable for CER planning, their inclusion in the stakeholder pool raises challenges due to differences in culture, training, incentives, priorities, and language norms.

Objective: To convene and evaluate a deliberative forum for engaging health system leaders and other stakeholders in order to shape health system research priorities for the PaTH Clinical Data Research Network.

Design: Break-out sessions and large-group deliberation solicited diverse perspectives and explored benefits and challenges of different research questions. Topic reframing, narrative integration and dynamic updating techniques facilitated communication across diverse backgrounds.

Participants: 29 health system and health plan leaders, clinicians, clinical researchers and patients from the network’s six participating health systems.

Main Measures: Audience response system (ARS) polling on general topic preferences; survey data on measures of engagement and deliberation success.

Key Results: A slate of ten specific research topics was vetted; after deliberation, the group converged to favor the characterization of high-utilizers of health care. Audience response polling revealed opinion shifts. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the experience and rated it highly for markers of deliberative quality (e.g., opportunity for active participation and adequate discussion, respect for others’ opinions and awareness of different perspectives). Fifty four percent noted their views on the issues changed. Most participants learned from the experience (93%) and agreed that the process helped them to empathize with the challenges of others (85%).

Conclusions: A deliberation forum can incorporate diverse stakeholders into CER, enabling participants to inform and learn from each other’s perspectives while shaping the research trajectory.


Social Networking:
Share |


Item Type: Article
Status: Published
CreatorsEmailPitt UsernameORCID
McTigue, Kathleen M.kmm34@pitt.edukmm34@pitt.edu0000-0002-0752-1576
Date: 2018
Date Type: Publication
Journal or Publication Title: European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare
Volume: 6
Number: 2
Publisher: The European Society for Person Centered Healthcare
Page Range: pp. 228-236
DOI or Unique Handle: 10.5750/ejpch.v6i2.1439
Schools and Programs: School of Medicine > Medicine
Refereed: Yes
Uncontrolled Keywords: Comparative effectiveness research, communication, health priorities, health services research, patient-centered care, patient engagement, person-centered healthcare, stakeholder engagement
ISSN: 2052-5656
Official URL:
Funders: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Article Type: Research Article
Date Deposited: 28 Apr 2021 17:47
Last Modified: 28 Apr 2021 17:47


Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item