Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T06:36:12.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Setting the research agenda for medically not yet explained symptoms (MNYES): a priority-setting partnership of patients, caregivers and clinicians

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2023

C. M. Van Der Feltz-Cornelis*
Affiliation:
1Health Sciences, University of York, York
J. Sweetman
Affiliation:
1Health Sciences, University of York, York
A. Moriarty
Affiliation:
1Health Sciences, University of York, York
P. Perros
Affiliation:
2Institute of Human Genetics, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne
A. Kaul
Affiliation:
3St. George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
N. Gall
Affiliation:
4King’s College Hospital, King’s College, London, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

This study establishes research priorities for Medically Not Yet Explained Symptoms (MNYES). A significant number of patients suffer from these symptoms, also known as MUS, that are likely to cause work disability and impact on quality of life. Research into MNYES in general has been poorly funded over the years, has been primarily researcher-led, and was sometimes controversial.

Objectives

To identify research priorities from the perspective of patients, caregivers and clinicians, following the James Lind Alliance (JLA) priority setting partnership (PSP) method.

Methods

The PSP Steering Group termed these symptoms Medically Not Yet Explained Symptoms (MNYES). This was an operational definition not intended to add to or replace other definitions already in use, that was constructed to embrace the views of all stakeholders. The nomenclature MNYES was chosen to indicate our incomplete understanding of these conditions. This could pertain to biological, psychological and social factors, as well as factors involving the trajectory of patients through various healthcare settings.

The study involved five key stages: defining the appropriate term for the conditions under study by the PSP Steering Group; gathering questions on MNYES from patients, caregivers and clinicians in a publicly accessible survey; checking these research questions against existing evidence; interim prioritisation in a second survey; and a final multi-stakeholder consensus meeting to determine the top 10 unanswered research questions using the modified nominal group methodology.

Results

Over 700 responses from UK patients, caregivers and clinicians were identified in two surveys from a broad range of medical specialities and primary care. Patients prioritised research questions regarding diagnosis and aetiology; clinicians and caregivers prioritised outcomes and treatment, relatively.

The top 10 unanswered research questions cover the domains of: treatment; the role of clinicians; symptoms and outcomes; and recovery.

Conclusions

This JLA PSP may well be the first attempt at capturing the thoughts of a wide group of medical professionals, patients and caregivers in one place with the aim eventually of standardising care and reducing unhelpful variability in the management of MNYES. Following the JLA approach is a strength of the study. The choice of the term MNYES conveys a message of hope, which responds to a need identified by patients, carers and clinicians alike for vigorous research in this domain. The research priorities are expected to generate much-needed, relevant and impactful research into MNYES. Better funding possibilities for MNYES are urgently needed.

Disclosure of Interest

None Declared

Type
Abstract
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the European Psychiatric Association
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.