Community Voices in Research (CVR): A lived experience expert-centred approach to advance the future of inheritable bleeding disorders
Artikel-Kategorie: Clinical Research
Online veröffentlicht: 11. Feb. 2025
Seitenbereich: 136 - 146
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jhp-2024-0020
Schlüsselwörter
© 2024 Maria E Santaella et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
There are multiple methods for gathering electronic and web-based data for research purposes including crowdsourcing [1,2], registries [3,4], web-based questionnaires, and patient-reported information [1–13]. These methods can recruit large cohorts of diverse samples in a cost-efficient and convenient manner [1,8]. Patient-reported data and medical records agreement for clinical information on comorbidities can be up to 90% [9], although agreement between patient-reported data versus what is reported in the medical record can depend upon variables such as race [10], sociodemographics [11], complexity of disease [11], comorbidities [13], and age [11]. For example, in one study when subjects were older and reported depression and anxiety, only fair agreement was noted between participants and their health records when reporting on their hypertension and diabetic management [13].
Inheritable bleeding disorders (BDs) are a group of rare diseases that increase the tendency to bleed, and include coagulation factor deficiencies like haemophilia, von Willebrand disease, and platelet dysfunctions. Historically, efforts to collect data in the United States (US) from persons with inheritable bleeding disorders (PIBD) have centred on clinical information entered by the healthcare team. Since 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has collected surveillance data from federally supported specialised haemophilia treatment centres (HTCs), initially, via the Universal Data Collection [14] initiative, progressing to Community Counts in partnership with the American Thrombosis & Hemostasis Network (ATHN) [15]. Additional clinical and diagnostic data collected by HTCs through ATHN provides a national research infrastructure [16–17].
The National Bleeding Disorders Foundation (NBDF; formerly known as the National Hemophilia Foundation) recognised the need to amplify the patient voice in research. PIBD are appropriately deemed ‘lived experience experts’ (LEEs) because they know better than anyone else how BDs affects their lives, what they go through to get a diagnosis and treatment, how treatments affect them, how symptoms or side effects impact daily life, and the challenges of interacting with the health care system. The term LEE also includes immediate family members (parents, partners, siblings, and grandparents) because they develop similar knowledge through their own lived experience, gained from another important viewpoint. Including LEEs’ perspectives in research ensures that research questions are relatable, recruitment and retention strategies are optimised, and study designs are less burdensome. Dissemination of results in lay language provides valuable and clear evidence to incorporate in shared decision making, promoting LEEs as active members of their health care team [18].
NBDF, founded in 1948, is the largest patient advocacy organisation in the US serving LEEs. Its mission is address gaps in knowledge to improve the lives of LEEs; ensure that the lived experience drives and influences the research process; promote equity, diversity, and inclusion so that research findings include all.
As a person-centred organisation committed to working with rather than for LEEs, NBDF understands the need to incorporate LEE perspectives in all matters that involve them. To support this vision, NBDF created
In this paper, we:
Document the evolution of Highlight mechanisms to incorporate LEEs in different stages of the research process Identify LEE-centred gaps in research based on data.
Established in 1975, the Nurse’s Health Study stands among the largest prospective investigations into the risk factors for major chronic diseases in women, with over 275,000 participants [22]. Motivated by this extensive longitudinal study, NBDF recognised a lost opportunity within the inheritable BD community to better understand LEE experiences, including those during the HIV and hepatitis crisis of the 1970s and 1980s, when at least 50% of LEEs with haemophilia contracted HIV [23] and 80% contracted Hepatitis C [24]. Consequently, the idea to establish a patient-reported, web-based registry to gather the experiences of PIBD and their families as LEEs was born, enabling timely data collection and reporting of their experiences and concerns.
MyBDC was NBDF’s first effort to comprehensively describe the LEE perspective longitudinally through electronic surveys and place it at the center of research. Initial goals were to transform the lived experience into evidence, identify trends and patterns, and develop LEE-inspired research priorities. This would include input from LEE subgroups who had not previously participated in data collection efforts, e.g. those receiving care outside of HTCs.
The development of MyBDC, which evolved into
comprehensively describe the experience of living with an inheritable BD; recognise relationships between health outcomes and variables such as bleeding, treatment, access to care, pain, anxiety, depression and social determinants of health; develop research questions and prioritise protocols based upon survey responses; provide participants with other research opportunities, research findings from data collected, and tailored educational resources; identify opportunities to improve health behaviours and quality of life through research, education, and advocacy.
Recruitment began in March of 2019 (Figure 1) and focused on LEEs with self-reported inheritable BDs and their immediate family members over the age of majority living in the US. In-person educational and advocacy events, such as NBDF’s Washington Days and Bleeding Disorders Conferences, and social media campaigns were targeted for recruitment.

Achieving a diverse and representative sample is more likely to happen with registries when compared to more traditional methods [1]. To ensure ongoing equity, diversity, and representation in
In 2020, MyBDC was rebranded to

Validated tools included in
TOOL | ABBREVIATION | FAMILY OR AFFECTED SURVEYS | |
---|---|---|---|
Adult Sickle Cell Quality of Life Measurement Information System (Pain Impact) | ASCQ-Me Pain Impact | Both | Both |
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Concise | AUDIT-C | New | Both |
Area Deprivation Index | ADI | New | Both |
Brief Resilient Coping Scale | BRCS | New | Both |
Duke-UNC Functional Social Support Questionnaire | FSSQ | Both | Both |
EuroQual 5 dimensions of health-5 levels | EQ-5D-5L | New | Both |
Family Experience with Health Care Provider Questionnaire | FHCPQ | New | Family only |
International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short form | IPAQ-SF | New | Both |
Pain questions from the 2016 National Health Interview Survey | NHIS pain | Both | Both |
Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire | PSEQ | New | Both |
PROMIS anxiety short form 7a | PROMIS-Anxiety 7a | Both | Both |
PROMIS depression short form 8b | PROMIS- |
Both | Both |
PROMIS neuropathic pain quality 5a | PROMIS-Neuro Pain Quality 5a | Both | Both |
PROMIS pain intensity 3a | PROMIS-Pain |
Both | Both |
PROMIS pain interference 4a | PROMIS-Pain |
Both | Both |
Protocol for Responding to and Assessing Patients’ Assets, Risks, and Experiences | PRAPARE | New | Both |
Ruta Menorrhagia Questionnaire | RMQ | New | Both |
Zarit Scale of Caregiver Burden (Zarit Burden Interview) | ZBI | New | Family only |
The

The experiences of immediate family members (mothers, fathers, siblings, grandparents, and other relatives) are explored via a separate

In addition to information via electronic surveys, create a health summary to share with health care providers and others; take available surveys; access aggregated, de-identified data, allowing them to follow their responses over time and compare them with others; connect with additional research opportunities (both internal and external); access research publications using explore vetted educational information.
Access to the
NBDF holds approximately 8-10 advisory panels per year facilitated by experts in the field. VAPs are usually two to three hours long and PAPs are around six to eight hours. Panels are composed of 6-10 LEEs to ensure that everyone can share their perspective. When outside researchers or industry sponsors are involved, participants’ personal or identifying information is kept private. Spanish and additional language translators are available during the eligibility process and panel discussions as needed. NBDF pre-screens questions and scripts with researchers to ensure session goals. Participants are reimbursed for their time. A final comprehensive written report is available to the sponsor/partner.
Examples of past advisory panel topics include:
improving the relationship between researchers and the BD community understanding emergency room experiences exploring health equity, diversity, and inclusion issues defining challenges with diagnosis and treatment clinical trial design development of educational programs and materials.
Data are safely gathered and stored on a secure server using the strictest of industry standards. NBDF staff do not have access to participants’ identifiable information. The information collected remains confidential and is only de-identified and aggregated data is reported.
Data are de-identified by a professional statistician with extensive research experience, in collaboration with the platform vendor via a secure file transfer protocol (SFTP). The data are then analysed, summarised, and aggregated by the statistician before results are shared. Raw data and individual responses are not accessible to NBDF, the community, or external researchers to protect data security and participant privacy – this is a priority to NBDF.
Since the launch of

Cumulative enrolment in
Starting in early 2020 and in partnership with NBDF, external researchers have been able to develop and launch surveys via
Publications and abstract presentations using
YEAR | TITLE | PUBLICATION | MEETING |
---|---|---|---|
2024 | The relationship between different pain measures, depression, and social support and race and ethnicity in persons with hemophilia | AJH | THSNA |
Glanzmann Thrombasthenia beyond bleeding: Insights from lived experience experts | Haemophilia | WFH | |
Pain attitudes and pain outcomes among people with bleeding disorders: Results from community voices in research [27] | Haemophilia | ||
2023 | Gene Therapy for Hemophilia A: A Mixed methods study of patient preferences & decision-making [28] | PPA | |
Development of a haemophilia A gene therapy shared decision making tool for clinicians [29] | Haemophilia | ||
Gene therapy preferences & informed decision-making: Results from NHF |
Haemophilia | ||
2022 | Relationship between perceived social support, mental health, activity, & chronic pain in PIBD [31] | Blood | ASH |
2021 | Community Voices in Research ( |
RPTH | HTRS |
Community Voices in Research ( |
DIA | ||
Poor outcomes in people with hemophilia: Physician & subject matter expert perspectives | ATHN | ||
Bleeding disorder data registry reveals racial/ethnic disparities that could significantly impact patient journey [33] | Blood | ASH | |
Utilizing a community registry to analyze pain limitations in PIBDs | ASPMN | ||
The relationship between self-reported physical activity, treatment, regimen, mental health, & pain in persons with hemophilia [34] | Haemophilia | WFH-MSK | |
Patient preferences & priorities for haemophilia gene therapy in the US: A discrete choice experiment [35] | Haemophilia | ||
Evidence of a disability paradox in patient-reported outcomes in haemophilia [36] | Haemophilia | ||
Preferences of people with hemophilia A and B for treatments including gene therapy in the US: A discrete choice experiment [37] | RPTH | THSNA | |
2020 | Developing My Bleeding Disorders Community (MyBDC): A community-powered registry to provide a 360-view of living with a bleeding disorder [38] | Haemophilia |
AJH: American Journal of Hematology
ASH: American Society of Hematology
ASPMN: American Society for Pain Management Nursing
DIA: Drug Information Association
PPA: Patient Preference and Adherence
RPTH: Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis
THSNA: Thrombosis and Hemostasis Summit of North America
WFH: World Federation of Hemophilia Annual Congress
WFH-MSK: World Federation of Hemophilia Musculoskeletal Congress
Through the PD, participants continue to have access to pending and completed surveys. They may also view aggregated survey responses in chart format, with the option to custom filter (e.g., by age and diagnosis) to further understand how their answers compare to others like them. NBDF staff regularly develop and curate new content aimed at continuing engagement.
As

The power of
During the inception of
The
The data collected through
Reliance on web-based recruitment during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted issues associated with this method and the importance of close monitoring to ensure data validity.
Protection of data remains a top priority. During the 2023 hiatus, the
While some clinicians have expressed concerns that self-reported data may not be as accurate as data collected directly from the clinician, many studies have shown that self-reported data [40–42] and patient-reported outcomes are accurate and valid [43,44]. Their use is recommended to better understand LEE views and measure outcomes relevant to them [45].
The inclusion of LEEs to enrich research has been effectively highlighted through the implementation of