(1) Inclusive research in Mental Health
Organized by: Mental Health
After diving into the topics discussed plenary in the morning. We have learned more about diversity, equity and inclusion on a more broad research level. But how do we apply diverse and inclusive research methods and mindset in mental health research? Arnoud Verhoeff from GGD Amsterdam – and member of the APH MH program council – started this session with a short introduction to the Sarphati Cohort in Amsterdam. Arnoud elaborated on the methods and data in this study aiming to include and represent the diverse Amsterdam population. After this introduction all 30 attendees to this session joined the interactive ‘Game of Goose’ (Ganzenbord). In this game the attendees teamed up in teams of 6. Every step of the board game the players discussed questions and statements about their own research, focusing on reaching and serving a diverse group of participants.
Topics discussed (e.g.): How do you make sure you reach your target audience? How do you make sure your research and data collection is inclusive? What can you do to make participation to your research more accessible? Since the questions and discussions were very interesting and engaging, we unfortunately did not finish the game and could not appoint a winner. Thanks to Marjolein Timmermans and colleagues from GGD Amsterdam and Sarphati Amsterdam for helping us talk about these issues in our mental health research.
(2) Responsible and ethical AI
Organized by: Digital Health and Personalized Medicine
The session, led by Matthan Caan (Digital Health) and Dick Willems (Personalized Medicine), focused on the integration and implications of responsible and ethical AI in healthcare. The first speaker, Kak Khee Yeung, vascular surgeon, discussed the VASCUL-AID project which aims to contribute to more personalized medicine in cardiovascular health. The project utilizes AI to predict disease progression, making use of big data to support professionals and patients.
The second speaker, Marieke Bak, a medical ethicist, took the stage to address the ethical challenges in AI implementation. She underscored the importance of diversity in AI development and cautioned against the potential risks associated with AI's current limitations in this area. The session then transitioned to an engaging discussion with APH researchers. Key topics included the critical role of healthcare professionals in the age of AI, the urgent need for their education on AI's capabilities and limitations, and concerns about scalability of embedded ethics and maintaining doctor autonomy in AI-assisted decision-making. The session concluded with a consensus on AI as a supportive tool, enhancing rather than replacing human-led healthcare.
3) Workshop: Dilemma's rondom co-creatie in onderzoek naar maatschappelijke participatie en gezondheid
(Dutch session)
Organized by: Societal Participation & Health
During the interactive co-creation workshop organized by Societal Participation and Health, Christine Dedding encouraged participants to reflect on the integration of co-creation with public partners into their research. She urged participants to openly share their experiences, prompting questions such as: How do you incorporate the perspectives of public partners in your research? What challenges do you face, and what systemic barriers exist? And more importantly, how can these challenges be overcome? Cécile Boot and Maaike Huijsmans candidly shared their co-creation experiences, leaving everyone inspired.
The workshop conveyed valuable take-home messages:
- Foster genuine connections; take the time to know each other before engaging in co-creation.
- Participation entails redistributing power and authority; embrace vulnerability for sincere collaboration.
- Co-creating research often involves uncertain outcomes, requiring researchers to step out of their comfort zones.
- Participation is about gathering data, not merely generating it.
- Grant applications should allocate space to explain the involvement of public partners in co-creation: Why choose it? What specific actions will be taken? What are the expected outcomes?
The session concluded with participants feeling equipped with fresh insights to enhance their research through meaningful co-creation with public partners.
(4) Diversity, equity and inclusion and representative research: challenges in recruitment and retention
Organized by: Methodology, Health Behaviors & Chronic Diseases, Aging & Later Life and Quality of Care
An important aspect of ensuring that study results have impact on practice is representativeness of the study population. It is therefore important to recruit, include and retain study participants that are as diverse as the target population. For example, think about a good representation in your study of different migrant groups, social economic status and people with disabilities. This is not easy and requires careful consideration in every type of study design.
In a lively session, attended by approximately 140 participants, APH programs Aging and Later Life, Health Behaviors and Chronic Diseases, Methodology and Quality of Care joined forces to explore challenges and solutions of representative research. Wessel van Wieringen (Epidemiology and Data science), Mirjam Franse (Public and Occupational Health) and Henrike Galenkamp (Public and Occupational Health) illustrated challenges for representation in respectively AI based research, qualitative research and as encountered in the HELIUS cohort study.
Discussions during breaks in between presentations resulted in the sharing of best practises, among other via Mentimeter. The most creative one was the recommendation to visit dance events of your intended target group. It shows that flexibility and a personalised approach are key.