• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Healthcare Policy >Deliberating as a Public Representative or as a Potential User? Two Complementary Perspectives that Should Inform Health Innovation Policy
【2h】

Deliberating as a Public Representative or as a Potential User? Two Complementary Perspectives that Should Inform Health Innovation Policy

机译：以公共代表或潜在用户的身份进行审议？应当为卫生创新政策提供信息的两种互补观点

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务，本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文，但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁，仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况，如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

While public involvement in health policy is gaining traction around the world, deciding whether practitioners of public involvement should encourage participants to deliberate from a personal or a collective perspective remains an object of contention. Drawing on an empirical study, the aim of this article is to generate methodological insights into these two perspectives. Our qualitative analyses illustrate how members of the public contributed differently to deliberations about the value of health innovations by alternatively sharing views as public representatives and as potential users. When engaging as public representatives, participants raised important collective concerns, and, when engaging as potential users, participants brought concrete details and contextual nuances to the group exchanges. Because these perspectives entail different yet mutually challenging ways of appraising health innovations, public engagement practitioners should foster both personal and collective perspectives.
机译：尽管公众对卫生政策的参与日益受到全世界的关注，但决定公众参与的实践者是否应鼓励参与者从个人或集体的角度进行审议仍是争论的对象。本文基于一项实证研究，旨在对这两种观点产生方法上的见解。我们的定性分析说明了公众如何通过交替分享公众代表和潜在用户的观点，对有关卫生创新价值的审议做出不同的贡献。在作为公共代表参与时，参与者提出了重要的集体关注，并且在作为潜在用户参与时，参与者为小组交流带来了具体的细节和上下文上的细微差别。由于这些观点需要不同但相互挑战的方式来评估卫生创新，因此公众参与从业人员应树立个人和集体观点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号