ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2018
Inverting the patient involvement paradigm: defining patient led research.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing the engagement of children and families in selecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and developing their measures: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Pooled it
- Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Trial
- High water vs. ad libitum water intake for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: a randomized controlled feasibility trial.QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians · 2020Trial
- A conceptual matrix model of patient involvement and patient expertise in medicines and medical technology research and development.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- What are the characteristics and impacts of a patient-led conference? A qualitative study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Factors supporting research capacity development in an English local authority: a qualitative description and comparison with proposed mechanisms.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Commercial or industrial use of mental health data for research: primer and best-practice guidelines from the DATAMIND patient/public Lived Experience Advisory Group.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Patient- and Public-Led Research - How Is It Defined and Practiced: A Scoping Review.Journal of patient experience · 2026Article
- Developing powerful PPIE partnerships in the design of an inclusive weight management service: a case study from the NewDAWN programme.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Advancing patient-led research and establishing a national IBD patient partner network in Canada: a call to action.Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Lived experience is essential for innovation in biomedical research.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2025Article
- Systematic Review of Patient and Caregiver Involvement in CKD Research.Kidney international reports · 2025Article
- Engaging an advisory board in discussions about the ethical relevance of algorithmic bias and fairness.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Patients as knowledge partners in the context of complex chronic conditions.Medical humanities · 2025Article
- Digital Information Exchange Between the Public and Researchers in Health Studies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Going beyond co-production: a public contributor led, local evaluation of the National Institute of Health and Social Care (NIHR) Research Champion role.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Patient-Led Research to Develop a Training Programme for Restoring Musical Joy in Cochlear Implant Recipients: A Reflexive Process Evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Series: Public engagement with research. Part 1: The fundamentals of public engagement with research.The European journal of general practice · 2023Article
- Needs of multimorbid heart failure patients and their carers: a qualitative interview study and the creation of personas as a basis for a blended collaborative care intervention.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- From Individuals to Systems and Contributions to Creations: Novel Framework for Mapping the Efforts of Individuals by Convening The Center of Health and Health Care.Journal of participatory medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
plain english summaryPatients usually understand their disease and lifestyle needs better than many medical professionals. They also have important ideas about what research would be most beneficial to their lives, especially on how to manage symptoms in a way that improves daily quality of life. In the UK, the National Institute for Health Research has recognised the value of patient insight, and now requires researchers with public funding to involve patients and the public throughout the research process. There are many opportunities for involvement, but these generally focus on improving study design to ensure the trial is acceptable to participants. Some programmes work towards setting research priorities as important to patients, public members, and medical experts, but due to the complexity and cost involved in running clinical trials, the majority of research originates with the pharmaceutical industry or academic institutions. There is a clear mismatch between research ideas that patients prioritise (quality of life), and those actually investigated (drug development).The Patient Led Research Hub (PLRH) is a new initiative hosted by the Cambridge Clinical Trials Unit. The PLRH supports research ideas as proposed by patient organisations, providing resources and expertise in research design and delivery. The PLRH aims to co-produce any technically feasible project, regardless of disease or symptom focus. The proposing patient group maintains ownership of the project with an active role in study management. This method of research has proven to produce credible research studies that are of direct relevance to patients. ABSTRACT: Patient and Public Involvement has become an indispensable and expected component of healthcare research in the United Kingdom, largely driven by the National Institute of Health Research and other research funders. Opportunities for patients to become involved in research abound, and many organisations now have dedicated 'public involvement' teams. However, its value is often questioned amidst criticism of tokenism and the recognition that a mismatch persists between patient priorities and funded research. Although patients are frequently consulted, evidence that their involvement influences the research agenda remains limited. We propose a novel model that allows patients and the public not only to propose research questions, but to design, initiate and deliver their own research with all the necessary support from research professionals. We demonstrate the feasibility and utility of this approach in reporting the establishment, experiences and progress of the Patient Led Research Hub. Using this resource, patient organisations are now able to initiate and conduct rigorous clinical research unfettered by the constraints of academic or economic agendas.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.