L Gordon1, A Dickinson2, M Offredy3, J Smiddy4. 1. Department of Allied Health and Midwifery, School of Health and Social Work, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Herts, AL10 9AB, UK. Electronic address: l.gordon@herts.ac.uk. 2. Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Herts, AL10 9AB, UK. Electronic address: A.M.Dickinson@herts.ac.uk. 3. Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Herts, AL10 9AB, UK. Electronic address: M.V.Offredy@herts.ac.uk. 4. Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care (CRIPACC), University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Herts, AL10 9AB, UK. Electronic address: J.E.Smiddy@herts.ac.uk.
Abstract
AIM: To explore the inclusion of patient and public involvement (PPI) in a qualitative study on the experiences of men with prostate cancer regarding information in radiotherapy. METHOD: The application of PPI to one doctoral research study is explored with respect to two perspectives: firstly, involvement of a patient reference group who informed the research design and materials, and secondly, the involvement of a public involvement in research group (PIRg) in advising the researcher during the design process. DISCUSSION: PPI is recognised as an important component of contemporary health research. PPI is becoming a common and essential requirement for high quality research projects and yet literature exploring or reporting the involvement and influence of PPI is sparse. Consideration is given to the national PPI landscape that has shaped public involvement in health research. CONCLUSION: The contribution of PPI to this study appears to have been beneficial to the development and evaluation of the study design, the self-worth of the reference group participants and demonstrates that the value of PPI in health research should not be underestimated.
AIM: To explore the inclusion of patient and public involvement (PPI) in a qualitative study on the experiences of men with prostate cancer regarding information in radiotherapy. METHOD: The application of PPI to one doctoral research study is explored with respect to two perspectives: firstly, involvement of a patient reference group who informed the research design and materials, and secondly, the involvement of a public involvement in research group (PIRg) in advising the researcher during the design process. DISCUSSION: PPI is recognised as an important component of contemporary health research. PPI is becoming a common and essential requirement for high quality research projects and yet literature exploring or reporting the involvement and influence of PPI is sparse. Consideration is given to the national PPI landscape that has shaped public involvement in health research. CONCLUSION: The contribution of PPI to this study appears to have been beneficial to the development and evaluation of the study design, the self-worth of the reference group participants and demonstrates that the value of PPI in health research should not be underestimated.
Authors: K Clare; A Ojo; J Teke; M Willis; G Akhtar; B Clegg; C Goddard; C Freeman; K J Drew; D Radley; C Homer; L Ells Journal: Perspect Public Health Date: 2022-07
Authors: Clayon B Hamilton; Alison M Hoens; Shanon McQuitty; Annette M McKinnon; Kelly English; Catherine L Backman; Tara Azimi; Negar Khodarahmi; Linda C Li Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 3.240