Literature DB >> 24118732

Supporting public involvement in research design and grant development: a case study of a public involvement award scheme managed by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service (RDS).

Jonathan D Boote1, Maureen Twiddy1, Wendy Baird1, Yvonne Birks1, Clare Clarke1, Daniel Beever1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is good practice for the public to be involved in developing health research. Resources should be available for researchers to fund the involvement of the public in the development of their grants.
OBJECTIVE: To describe a funding award scheme to support public involvement in grant development, managed by an NIHR Research Design Service (RDS). Case examples of how the award contributed to successful grant applications and findings from a recent evaluation of the scheme are presented.
DESIGN: A case study of resource provision to support public involvement activities in one region of England. PARTICIPANTS: University and NHS-based researchers, and members of the public.
FINDINGS: Between 2009 and 2012, the RDS approved 45 public involvement funding awards (totalling nearly £19,000). These awards contributed to 27 submitted applications at the time of writing, of which 11 were successful (totalling over £7.5 million). The evaluation revealed difficulties encountered by some researchers when involving the public in grant development, which led to suggestions about how the scheme could be improved.
CONCLUSION: This award scheme represents an efficient method of providing researchers with resources to involve the public in grant development and would appear to represent good value for money.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  grant development; public involvement; research design; support and resources

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24118732      PMCID: PMC5060846          DOI: 10.1111/hex.12130

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Expect        ISSN: 1369-6513            Impact factor:   3.377


  13 in total

1.  'But is it a question worth asking?' A reflective case study describing how public involvement can lead to researchers' ideas being abandoned.

Authors:  Jonathan D Boote; Mary Dalgleish; Janet Freeman; Zena Jones; Marianne Miles; Helen Rodgers
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  User involvement in the development of a research bid: barriers, enablers and impacts.

Authors:  Sophie Staniszewska; Nicola Jones; Mary Newburn; Shanit Marshall
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  The impact of patient and public involvement in the work of the Dementias & Neurodegenerative Diseases Research Network (DeNDRoN): case studies.

Authors:  Steve Iliffe; Terry McGrath; Douglas Mitchell
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-09-08       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  What patients want: consumer involvement in the design of a randomized controlled trial of routine oxygen supplementation after acute stroke.

Authors:  Khalid Ali; Christine Roffe; Peter Crome
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2006-02-02       Impact factor: 7.914

5.  Consulting parents about the design of a randomized controlled trial of osteopathy for children with cerebral palsy.

Authors:  Vanessa Edwards; Katrina Wyatt; Stuart Logan; Nicky Britten
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 3.377

6.  Consumer involvement in consent document development: a multicenter cluster randomized trial to assess study participants' understanding.

Authors:  Peter Guarino; Diana Elbourne; James Carpenter; Peter Peduzzi
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.486

7.  Exception from informed consent for pediatric resuscitation research: community consultation for a trial of brain cooling after in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Marilyn C Morris; Vinay M Nadkarni; Frances R Ward; Robert M Nelson
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  Thrombolysis for acute ischaemic stroke: consumer involvement in design of new randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Liedeke Koops; Richard I Lindley
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-08-24

9.  Patient and clinician collaboration in the design of a national randomized breast cancer trial.

Authors:  Jo Marsden; Jane Bradburn
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Building research capital to facilitate research.

Authors:  Gill Green; Melanie Rein
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2013-04-04
View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  Lessons Learned from Developing a Patient Engagement Panel: An OCHIN Report.

Authors:  Jill Arkind; Sonja Likumahuwa-Ackman; Nate Warren; Kay Dickerson; Lynn Robbins; Kathy Norman; Jennifer E DeVoe
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2015 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.657

2.  Patient and public involvement in general practice research.

Authors:  Ben Bowers; Roberta Lovick; Kristian Pollock; Stephen Barclay
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-04-30       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  From plans to actions in patient and public involvement: qualitative study of documented plans and the accounts of researchers and patients sampled from a cohort of clinical trials.

Authors:  Deborah Buck; Carrol Gamble; Louise Dudley; Jennifer Preston; Bec Hanley; Paula R Williamson; Bridget Young
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Priorities for methodological research on patient and public involvement in clinical trials: A modified Delphi process.

Authors:  Anna Kearney; Paula Williamson; Bridget Young; Heather Bagley; Carrol Gamble; Simon Denegri; Delia Muir; Natalie A Simon; Stephen Thomas; Jim T Elliot; Helen Bulbeck; Joanna C Crocker; Claire Planner; Claire Vale; Mike Clarke; Tim Sprosen; Kerry Woolfall
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Evaluating public involvement in research design and grant development: Using a qualitative document analysis method to analyse an award scheme for researchers.

Authors:  Susan Baxter; Delia Muir; Louise Brereton; Christine Allmark; Rosemary Barber; Lydia Harris; Brian Hodges; Samaira Khan; Wendy Baird
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2016-04-01

6.  Involving patients in research during a pandemic.

Authors:  Carolyn A Chew-Graham
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Exploring perceived barriers, drivers, impacts and the need for evaluation of public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi study.

Authors:  D Snape; J Kirkham; N Britten; K Froggatt; F Gradinger; F Lobban; Jennie Popay; K Wyatt; Ann Jacoby
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 2.692

8.  Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: a systematic cohort investigation.

Authors:  Carrol Gamble; Louise Dudley; Alison Allam; Philip Bell; Heather Goodare; Bec Hanley; Jennifer Preston; Alison Walker; Paula Williamson; Bridget Young
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Enablers and barriers for women with gestational diabetes mellitus to achieve optimal glycaemic control - a qualitative study using the theoretical domains framework.

Authors:  Ruth Martis; Julie Brown; Judith McAra-Couper; Caroline A Crowther
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Building Meaningful Patient Engagement in Research: Case Study From ADVANCE Clinical Data Research Network.

Authors:  Nathaniel T Warren; James A Gaudino; Sonja Likumahuwa-Ackman; Kristin Dickerson; Lynn Robbins; Kathy Norman; John Lind; Sele D'Amato; Perry Foley; Rachel Gold; Vance Bauer; Scott A Fields; Deborah J Cohen; Khaya D Clark; Jennifer E DeVoe
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 2.983

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.