Search

This database consists of the Peruvian media diet in a post-pandemic context. Specifically, it examines how Peruvians define and utilise media to create environments for information, learning, and entertainment. Since the pandemic, the relationship that users have developed with the media has intensified and changed, fostering new uses and interactions. However, our data demonstrates that the Peruvian public maintains a critical role towards mass media (broadcasting model) [1], which motivates them to seek out media and platforms that cater to their interests and expectations. In this regard, we compare three axes of analysis (information, education, and entertainment), taking socio demographic variables, to produce a baseline that is useful for specific research projects. Through a quantitative approach we explored the expectations, decisions, forms of interaction, and satisfactions that users obtain in their relationship with the media, offering new theoretical insights based on emerging data, such as the level of planning in content consumption or the role that traditional media play in different age and socioeconomic groups., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

We explored the feasibility, suitability, and reliability of using controls recruited among members of a non-probabilistic online panel ('panel controls') in a case-control study (CCS) to investigate a Salmonella Braenderup outbreak in Germany. For comparison, another control group was recruited via random digit dialling ('classical controls'). Panel members received questionnaires by email; classical controls were interviewed by phone. Both control groups were frequency-matched to cases by age and sex; the classical controls also by federal state. Cases and controls were queried mainly about fruit consumption since melons were the suspected infection vehicle. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using single-variable and multivariable logistic regression. The study included 32 cases, 81 panel controls and 110 classical controls. Analyses identified melons, particularly Galia melons, as the most likely infection vehicle using either control group (panel controls - aOR 12, CI 2.7-66; classical controls - aOR 55, CI 8-1100). Recruitment of panel versus classical controls required substantially less person-time (8 vs. 111 hours) and was about 10 times less expensive. We recommend this timely and reliable control recruitment method when investigating diffuse foodborne outbreaks with CCS.

Established methods of recruiting population controls for case-control studies in infectious disease outbreak investigations are resource- and time-intensive, and are often subject to bias. The online panel have recently gained interest as an easy and timely method to select controls. We examined the feasibility, suitability and reliability of using an online panel to select controls for case-control studies as part of investigations of diffuse food and waterborne outbreaks. In January 2019, we deployed a web survey by email to the 277 members of a non-probabilistic online panel in Lower Saxony, Germany. We questioned them on basic sociodemographic characteristics and eating habits. They were frequency matched to cases on sex and age. Their food exposures were compared to those of traditionally recruited controls of four historical case-controls studies, which successfully investigated food and waterborne outbreaks. We used logistic regressions to assess the association between the food exposures and the disease (odds ratios). The use of a control panel successfully led to the identification of the food items in three of the four historical outbreak investigations, and their recruitment benefitted from increased speed and limited costs. Timely outbreak investigations would enable rapidly implementing control measures. We recommend the further evaluation of using panellists as controls in parallel case-control studies and case-panel studies.

Plain English Summary: Evidence shows that public and patient involvement in research has a positive effect on its quality and end-results. Thus, public and patient involvement in all stages of research is becoming commonplace. There are limited detailed examples however, that describe how to make this possible, especially for those doing PhD research. Doctoral researchers are often new to research practice or have limited experience and are often bound by strict time and financial constraints. It is also not usually a requirement of the award to involve public and patients in their research. Hence, they may not feel confident or motivated to involve or engage with public and patients during their research. We, four doctoral researchers, share examples from our own research studies that have included different approaches to public and patient involvement. Two studies formed public and patient advisory groups who helped design the research questions, data collection tools and recruitment methods. One enlisted the help of an online public and patient panel from a local hospital. A different study worked with patients from an established group to help define key medical words. We did face some challenges, such as the need to develop good group work skills and to apply for grants to cover reimbursement, but we all found it beneficial to involve patients in our studies. We noticed a positive effect on each study's progression and an improvement in our own self-esteem. In addition, having public and patient involvement helped reduce the isolation we felt as doctoral researchers. Thus, we strongly encourage more doctoral researchers to involve public and patients in their studies., Abstract: Public and patient involvement (PPI) has been shown to have a positive impact on health and social care research. However, adequate examples describing how to operationalise effective PPI, especially in doctoral studies, are lacking. Hence, doctoral researchers new to research, or those with limited experience, can be discouraged from facilitating PPI in their research. This paper aims to describe and discuss in detail the approaches used by four doctoral researchers to incorporate PPI at different stages of their research studies from study design to disseminating findings.We aim to inform other doctoral researchers about the challenges and limitations relating to PPI that we faced. Through these, we share pragmatic recommendations for facilitating PPI during doctoral studies.The description of four case studies demonstrated that PPI could be incorporated at various stages during doctoral research. This has had a beneficial impact on our research study progression, researcher self-esteem and lastly, helped alleviate researcher isolation during doctoral studies., Competing Interests: Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Background: Public and stakeholder engagement can improve the quality of both research and policy decision making. However, such engagement poses significant methodological challenges in terms of collecting and analysing input from large, diverse groups., Objective: To explain how online approaches can facilitate iterative stakeholder engagement, to describe how input from large and diverse stakeholder groups can be analysed and to propose a collaborative learning framework (CLF) to interpret stakeholder engagement results., Methods: We use 'A National Conversation on Reducing the Burden of Suicide in the United States' as a case study of online stakeholder engagement and employ a Bayesian data modelling approach to develop a CLF., Results: Our data modelling results identified six distinct stakeholder clusters that varied in the degree of individual articulation and group agreement and exhibited one of the three learning styles: learning towards consensus, learning by contrast and groupthink. Learning by contrast was the most common, or dominant, learning style in this study., Conclusion: Study results were used to develop a CLF, which helps explore multitude of stakeholder perspectives; identifies clusters of participants with similar shifts in beliefs; offers an empirically derived indicator of engagement quality; and helps determine the dominant learning style. The ability to detect learning by contrast helps illustrate differences in stakeholder perspectives, which may help policymakers, including Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, make better decisions by soliciting and incorporating input from patients, caregivers, health-care providers and researchers. Study results have important implications for soliciting and incorporating input from stakeholders with different interests and perspectives., (© 2015 The Authors. Health Expectations Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)