For this issue, we are presenting the take-home messages from Pierre-Antoine Juge et al. paper investigating the participation of junior members, and patient and healthcare professional representatives in EULAR task forces. This is a very important piece of work because it addresses challenges representative members face when working in a task force, and we would encourage all EMEUNET members interested in participating in EULAR task forces (TF) to read the paper.
Since 2014, in addition to traditional members (i.e., convenors, methodologists, experts and fellows), EULAR task forces require the participation of ≥2 EMEUNET members, a health professional in rheumatology (HPR) and two patient research partners (PRP), allowing contribution from all EULAR communities. Juge et al. evaluated the participation of these members in EULAR task forces and compared their experience with that of traditional TF members.
An online survey was developed and distributed among previous EULAR TF members. 77 TF members from 24 countries completed the survey, with 62% being women. Respondents identified themselves as rheumatologists (56%), researchers (42%), HPR (25%), and patients (19%). In total, 46 (60%) had participated as a junior or representative TF member.
The main findings include:
- Among 14/74 (19%) participants who felt unprepared for their first TF, 10 were junior or representative members (4 junior members, 3 HPR and 3 PRP).
- Participants who reported feeling unprepared stated that they would have wanted meetings beforehand (57%) or written documents (36%), even though half of them had read the SOP before the TF.
- The main barriers to participation were: “What I wanted to say had already been said,” “Members were talking too much,” and “My role was unclear.”
In conclusion, junior and representative members of EULAR TFs felt less involved and prepared compared to traditional members. EULAR mandates their inclusion in TFs for diverse perspectives, nonetheless, these members face specific barriers. Training and support are essential for their active participation. The authors suggest solutions, like providing instructional resources, using blinded voting and allowing each member to privately share concerns to mitigate dominance. Systematic evaluations post-TF are suggested to better understand and address these barriers, ultimately enhancing the contribution of all TF members.
Anastasia Madenidou on behalf of the Newletter Sub-committe
…with the support of the article authors Pierre-Antoine Juge and Manouk de Hooge
