Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23866730›Full record

ArticleTrials2013

Involving service users in trials: developing a standard operating procedure.

Bridie Angela Evans, Emma Bedson, Philip Bell, Hayley Hutchings, Lesley Lowes, David Rea, Anne Seagrove, Stefan Siebert, Graham Smith, Helen Snooks and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: Systematic review and co-design pilot.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Patient and healthcare professionals' perceptions of a combined blood and faecal immunochemical test for excluding colorectal cancer diagnosis in primary care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Implementing public involvement throughout the research process-Experience and learning from the GPs in EDs study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Patient involvement in qualitative data analysis in a trial of a patient-centred intervention: Reconciling lay knowledge and scientific method.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Article
  20. Preparing researchers for patient and public involvement in scientific research: Development of a hands-on learning approach through action research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Bridie Angela EvansCollege of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, Wales, UK. b.a.evans@swansea.ac.uk
Emma Bedson
Philip Bell
Hayley Hutchings
Lesley Lowes
David Rea
Anne Seagrove
Stefan Siebert
Graham Smith
Helen Snooks
Marie Thomas
Kym Thorne
Ian Russell
West Wales Organisation for Rigorous Trials in Health (WWORTH)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany funding bodies require researchers to actively involve service users in research to improve relevance, accountability and quality. Current guidance to researchers mainly discusses general principles. Formal guidance about how to involve service users operationally in the conduct of trials is lacking. We aimed to develop a standard operating procedure (SOP) to support researchers to involve service users in trials and rigorous studies.

methodsResearchers with experience of involving service users and service users who were contributing to trials collaborated with the West Wales Organisation for Rigorous Trials in Health, a registered clinical trials unit, to develop the SOP. Drafts were prepared in a Task and Finish Group, reviewed by all co-authors and amendments made.

resultsWe articulated core principles, which defined equality of service users with all other research team members and collaborative processes underpinning the SOP, plus guidance on how to achieve these. We developed a framework for involving service users in research that defined minimum levels of collaboration plus additional consultation and decision-making opportunities. We recommended service users be involved throughout the life of a trial, including planning and development, data collection, analysis and dissemination, and listed tasks for collaboration. We listed people responsible for involving service users in studies and promoting an inclusive culture. We advocate actively involving service users as early as possible in the research process, with a minimum of two on all formal trial groups and committees. We propose that researchers protect at least 1% of their total research budget as a minimum resource to involve service users and allow enough time to facilitate active involvement.

conclusionsThis SOP provides guidance to researchers to involve service users successfully in developing and conducting clinical trials and creating a culture of actively involving service users in research at all stages. The UK Clinical Research Collaboration should encourage clinical trials units actively to involve service users and research funders should provide sufficient funds and time for this in research grants.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationResearch SubjectsClinical Trials as TopicCooperative BehaviorDecision Support TechniquesGuidelines as TopicHumansInterdisciplinary CommunicationProgram DevelopmentResearch DesignResearch PersonnelWales

Identifiers

PMID23866730
PMCPMC3725161

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.