Article Text

Original research
Quantitative online survey of self-perceived knowledge and knowledge gaps of medicines research and development among Finnish general public
  1. Mirjami Tran Minh1,
  2. Manu Tamminen2,
  3. Jenni Tamminen-Sirkiä3,
  4. Muntasir Mamun Majumder4,
  5. Rubina Tabassum4,
  6. Tuuli Lahti1,5
  1. 1 Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
  2. 2 Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Turku, Turku, Finland
  3. 3 Colores - the Finnish Colorectal Cancer Association, Helsinki, Finland
  4. 4 Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
  5. 5 Health and Well-being, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland
  1. Correspondence to Mirjami Tran Minh; mirjami.tran{at}helsinki.fi

Abstract

Objectives This study explored self-reported knowledge and interest to learn more about medicines research, development and health technology assessment among Finnish general public. It also aimed to define possible knowledge gaps and needs for public education regarding these topics.

Design Online survey with 503 participants. The questionnaire was originally developed as a part of the Needs Assessment Work Package of the European Patients’ Academy on Therapeutic Innovation Project. The survey was carried out in Finland in 2019.

Methods The survey was conducted as an online survey by Kantar TNS Gallup Forum online panel. The data were analysed by using the freely available programming language R. Relationships between the demographic characteristics (such as age, gender and education level) of respondents and their knowledge or interest in medicines research and development were determined using Pearson’s χ2 tests. Statistically significant responses of demographic characteristics in the respondents’ knowledge or interest in medicines research were determined by logistic regression.

Results Of the 503 respondents (age 16–64) only 12% reported having good or very good knowledge of medicines research and development in general. Regarding health technology assessment, pharmacoeconomics and regulation, the percentage of respondents reporting good or very good knowledge was as low as 8%. Respondents were most interested in learning more about predictive and personalised medicine (47%) and least interested in medicines regulation (30%) and pharmacoeconomics (31%).

Conclusions Self-reported knowledge about medicines research and development and health technology assessment appears to be very low in Finland. Patient and public participation is recognised as an important and essential element in up-to-date medical research and assessment of new treatments. In order to participate as an active and equal partner in these processes, the public needs more information and education in these topics.

  • Health literacy
  • Medicines Research and Development (R&D)
  • Health technology assessment (HTA)
  • Patient and public involvement (PPI)

Data availability statement

Data are available in a public, open access repository. The dataset(s) supporting the conclusions of this article are available in the Zenodo repository (dataset).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

Data are available in a public, open access repository. The dataset(s) supporting the conclusions of this article are available in the Zenodo repository (dataset).

View Full Text

Supplementary materials

  • Supplementary Data

    This web only file has been produced by the BMJ Publishing Group from an electronic file supplied by the author(s) and has not been edited for content.

Footnotes

  • Twitter @mirjamitm, @tamminen_ry, @tuuli_lahti

  • Contributors MTM, TL, JT-S and MMM participated in planning and developing the survey. MT and RT conducted the statistical analyses. MTM, MT and TL drafted the manuscript, and MTM is the guarantor. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

  • Funding Open access funded by Helsinki University Library.

  • Competing interests MTM, TL, JT-S and MMM are members of the EUPATI Finland executive committee.

  • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research. Refer to the Methods section for further details.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.