Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis paper offers a new child‐centred methodology that explores children's visions of their futures, encourages self‐reflection and depth and shares children's voices with peers and researchers, as unbrokered as possible. This final stage of a longitudinal, arts‐based, social science‐informed project was delivered by partnering with schools in socially disadvantaged areas of Bristol, a UK city. Our two‐phase activity used a Tree metaphor to explore children's hopes, ambitions and support, looking forward to recovery from the COVID‐19 pandemic. The analysis combined multi‐disciplinary thematic and visual‐narrative analysis, and revealed diversity, intersection and individuality in themes that scaled out from the child and their family over different timescales. Themes included emotion (concerns; empathy), experiences (happenings, resources skills; aspirations) and relationships, linked to their recent experiences of COVID‐19 mitigation. The paper reflects critically on children's and researchers' positionality, and the complexities involved in developing research methods that encourage children's autonomy, agency and authenticity.

Background:Evidence regarding the impact of psychological problems on recovery from injury has limited influence on practice. Mindlines show effective practice requires diverse knowledge which is generally socially transmitted.
Aims and objectives:Develop and test a method blending patient, practitioner, and research evidence and using Forum Theatre to enable key stakeholders to interact with it.
Assess this methods; impact on contributing individuals/groups; on behaviour, practice, and research; mechanisms enabling these changes to occur.
Methods:Stage-1: captured patient (n=53), practitioner (n=62), and research/expert (n=3) evidence using interviews, focus groups, literature review; combined these strands using framework analysis and conveyed them in a play. Stage-2: patients (n=32), carers (n=3), practitioners (n=31), and researchers (n=16) attended Forum Theatre workshops where they shared experiences, watched the play, re-enacted elements, and co-produced service improvements. Stage-3: used the Social Impact Framework to analyse study outcome data and establish what changed, how and why.
Findings:This approach enhanced individuals'/group knowledge of post-injury psychopathology, confidence in their knowledge, mutual understanding, creativity, attitudes towards knowledge mobilisation, and research. These cognitive, attitudinal, and relational impacts led to multilevel changes in behaviour, practice, and research. Four key mechanisms enabled this research to occur and create impact: diverse knowledge, drama/storytelling, social interaction, actively altering outcomes.
Discussion and conclusions:Discourse about poor uptake of scientific evidence focuses on methods to aid translation and implementation; this study shows how mindlines can reframe this 'problem' and inform impactful research.
EPPIC demonstrated how productive interaction between diverse stakeholders using creative means bridges gaps between evidence, knowledge, and action.