Literature DB >> 34127074

Who should I involve in my research and why? Patients, carers or the public?

Kristina Staley1, Jim Elliott2, Derek Stewart3, Roger Wilson4.   

Abstract

Patient and public involvement in research helps to make it more relevant and useful to the end-users. Involvement influences the design, delivery and dissemination of research, ultimately leading to better services, treatments and care. Researchers are therefore keen to involve patients, carers and public in their work, but are sometimes uncertain about who to involve. Some confusion may arise from the terms used. The UK's catch-all term 'patient and public involvement' suggests this is a single activity, that perhaps both 'patient' and 'public' input are needed, or that either will do. The terms 'patient', 'carer' and 'public' have been defined, but are not used consistently. In fact there are many different contexts for involvement and many different kinds of decisions made, which then determine whose input will be most valuable.Clarity about the 'why' can help answer the 'who' question. However, not all researchers are clear about the purpose of involvement. While it is often understood to have a moral purpose, or to improve research quality, this doesn't always identify who needs to be involved. When learning is understood to be the purpose of involvement, then the most appropriate people to involve are those with relevant experiential knowledge. In research projects, these are people with lived experience of the topic being investigated. This could be patients, carers, members of the public or health professionals.In this article we discuss how involving people who do not have the relevant experiential 'lived' knowledge may contribute to ineffective or tokenistic involvement. These people are as likely as researchers to make assumptions, risking missing key insights or resulting in outcomes that are off-putting or even harmful to research participants.We conclude that greater attention needs to be given to the question of who to involve. Raising awareness of the significance of experiential knowledge and the contextual factors that determine whose input will be most useful will help everyone to understand their roles and improve the quality of involvement. It will help to maximise the opportunities for learning, increasing the likelihood of impact, and helping to achieve the ultimate goal of improved health and services.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Patient public involvement

Year:  2021        PMID: 34127074     DOI: 10.1186/s40900-021-00282-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Involv Engagem        ISSN: 2056-7529


  8 in total

1.  Recovery from mental illness as an emergent concept and practice in Australia and the UK.

Authors:  Shulamit Ramon; Bill Healy; Noel Renouf
Journal:  Int J Soc Psychiatry       Date:  2007-03

2.  National Standards for Public Involvement in Research: missing the forest for the trees.

Authors:  Matthew S McCoy; Karin Rolanda Jongsma; Phoebe Friesen; Michael Dunn; Carolyn Plunkett Neuhaus; Leah Rand; Mark Sheehan
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  How did I not see that? Perspectives of nonconsumer mental health researchers on the benefits of collaborative research with consumers.

Authors:  Brenda Happell; Sarah Gordon; Julia Bocking; Pete Ellis; Cath Roper; Jackie Liggins; Chris Platania-Phung; Brett Scholz
Journal:  Int J Ment Health Nurs       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 3.503

4.  Exploring areas of consensus and conflict around values underpinning public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi study.

Authors:  D Snape; J Kirkham; J Preston; J Popay; N Britten; M Collins; K Froggatt; A Gibson; F Lobban; K Wyatt; A Jacoby
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Involving the public in epidemiological public health research: a qualitative study of public and stakeholder involvement in evaluation of a population-wide natural policy experiment.

Authors:  Rachel Anderson de Cuevas; Lotta Nylén; Bo Burström; Margaret Whitehead
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-04-20       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Involving patients and the public in medical and health care research studies: An exploratory survey on participant recruiting and representativeness from the perspective of study authors.

Authors:  Jonas Lander; Holger Langhof; Marie-Luise Dierks
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Patient and public involvement in the design of clinical trials: An overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Amy Price; Loai Albarqouni; Jo Kirkpatrick; Mike Clarke; Su May Liew; Nia Roberts; Amanda Burls
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 2.431

8.  Is it worth it? Patient and public views on the impact of their involvement in health research and its assessment: a UK-based qualitative interview study.

Authors:  Joanna C Crocker; Anne-Marie Boylan; Jennifer Bostock; Louise Locock
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2016-06-24       Impact factor: 3.377

  8 in total
  4 in total

1.  Patient involvement in rare diseases research: a scoping review of the literature and mixed method evaluation of Norwegian researchers' experiences and perceptions.

Authors:  Gry Velvin; Thale Hartman; Trine Bathen
Journal:  Orphanet J Rare Dis       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 4.303

2.  A qualitative study on the involvement of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer during multiple research phases: "plan, structure, and discuss".

Authors:  Camila Rosalinde van Ham; Vivian Wilhelmina Gerarda Burgers; Sophia Helena Eva Sleeman; Annemiek Dickhout; Niels Christiaan Gerardus Laurus Harthoorn; Eveliene Manten-Horst; Mies Christina van Eenbergen; Olga Husson
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2022-07-08

3.  Patient and public involvement in randomised clinical trials: a mixed-methods study of a clinical trials unit to identify good practice, barriers and facilitators.

Authors:  Lucy Ellen Selman; Clare Clement; Margaret Douglas; Keith Douglas; Jodi Taylor; Chris Metcalfe; J Athene Lane; Jeremy Horwood
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-10-23       Impact factor: 2.279

4.  Determining stakeholder priorities and core components for school-based identification of mental health difficulties: A Delphi study.

Authors:  Emma Soneson; Anne-Marie Burn; Joanna K Anderson; Ayla Humphrey; Peter B Jones; Mina Fazel; Tamsin Ford; Emma Howarth
Journal:  J Sch Psychol       Date:  2022-02-08
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.