Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGriffiths, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorGude, A
dc.contributor.authorGreene, L
dc.contributor.authorWeston, L
dc.contributor.authorSutcliffe, CL
dc.contributor.authorWheat, Hannah
dc.contributor.authorOh, Tomasina M
dc.contributor.authorByng, Richard
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-04T12:45:11Z
dc.date.available2022-04-04T12:45:11Z
dc.date.issued2022-02-11
dc.identifier.issn1471-3012
dc.identifier.issn1741-2684
dc.identifier.other147130122110673
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18994
dc.description.abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Background and purpose</jats:title><jats:p> Adults lacking capacity are under-represented in research; therefore, the evidence-base surrounding their support needs is inferior compared to other populations. Involving this group in research is fraught with challenges, including researcher uncertainties about how to carry out capacity judgements. Whilst ethical guidelines and principles provide overarching guidance, there is a lack of detailed guidance and evidence-based training, incorporating practical ‘on the ground’ strategies and advice on communication practices. Experiences and reflections on research procedures used to gauge and address capacity are under reported, resulting in a lack of shared knowledge within the field. </jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Design</jats:title><jats:p> To help address this, we engaged in researcher (co)meta-reflection on the informed capacity judgement procedure for initial consent, within our current, person-centred dementia intervention feasibility study. Our objective was to identify areas to improve our approach, but to also put forward suggestions for wider change within ethical research practice. </jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p> Findings reveal challenges and facilitators relating to six areas: ‘Conducting time sensitive research whilst remaining person-centred and building relationships’; ‘Information sharing and supporting communication’; ‘Applying the process flexibly’; ‘The role of the carer and the consultee process’; ‘Judging assent and dissent’ and ‘Researcher related factors’. We questioned our ‘capacity to make capacity judgements’ in terms of both our skills and research time constraints. </jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p> Based on our experiences, we argue for greater open discussion between researchers, Patient and Public Involvement contributors and Research Ethics Committees at initial project planning stages. We recommend training and guidance focuses on building researcher skills in applying a standard process flexibly, emphasising naturalistic, conversational approaches to capacity judgement. A crucial consideration for funders is how this time-intensive and sensitive work should be factored into bid application templates and funding grants. Learnings from this article have potential to inform evidence-based guidance and training for researchers, consultees, funders, reviewers and ethics committees. </jats:p></jats:sec>

dc.format.extent972-994
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSAGE Publications
dc.subjectDementia
dc.subjectresearch participation
dc.subjectcapacity judgement
dc.subjectreflection on research practice
dc.subjectresearch practice recommendations
dc.title‘Do I have the capacity to make capacity judgements?’ Researcher reflections from a person-centred dementia support study
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000759242700001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue3
plymouth.volume21
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalDementia
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/14713012211067320
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/FoH - Community and Primary Care
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CCT&PS
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Plymouth Institute of Health and Care Research (PIHR)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-11-29
dc.rights.embargodate2022-4-7
dc.identifier.eissn1741-2684
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.funderNational Institute for Health Research
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDementia - Person Aligned Care Team (D-PACT)
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1177/14713012211067320
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-02-11
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
plymouth.funderDementia - Person Aligned Care Team (D-PACT)::National Institute for Health Research


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV