Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30770732›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2019

A co-produced method to involve service users in research: the SUCCESS model.

Bridie Angela Evans, Alison Porter, Helen Snooks, Vanessa Burholt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Take-home naloxone in multicentre emergency settings: the TIME feasibility cluster RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Patients as partners in health research: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Users' and researchers' construction of equity in research collaboration.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  14. "About sixty per cent I want to do it": Health researchers' attitudes to, and experiences of, patient and public involvement (PPI)-A qualitative interview study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2019
    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

4 authors.

Bridie Angela EvansMedical School, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK. b.a.evans@swansea.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-0293-0888
Alison PorterMedical School, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK.
Helen SnooksMedical School, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK.
Vanessa BurholtCentre for Innovative Ageing, College of Human and Health Science, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic and patient involvement is a routine element of health services research methods to produce better designed and reported studies. Although co-production is recommended when involving people in research, methods for involving people are usually designed and managed by researchers and there is little evidence about methods to co-produce models for effective public and patient involvement. We report the method used by a group of patient and carer service users to develop and implement a model for involving public members in research.

methodWe recruited people with experience of chronic conditions, as patients and carers, and supported them to develop and implement the involvement model. We collected written records to describe the processes of co-production.

resultsSixteen service users were involved through a series of workshop, meeting and email discussions. They specified principles and operating characteristics of the model which concerned an inclusive culture, adequate resources, accessibility, good communication and clarity of purpose and roles. Components of the model included an on-line Panel of members (n = 20), Steering Group meetings, representation and communication system, facilitator, supportive research environment and access to research activities. Over 8 years, members were active in 218 research activities and held 22 Steering Group meetings. The model was named SUCCESS standing for Service Users with Chronic Conditions Encouraging Sensible Solutions.

conclusionWe supported patients and carers to co-produce the SUCCESS model of involvement in research. The model's components, addressing their needs and priorities, led to sustained involvement in research over 8 years. Further work is needed to apply the model in different settings and assess impact of this method of involving people in research.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalCaregiversChronic DiseaseCommunity ParticipationCooperative BehaviorHealth Services ResearchHumansPatient ParticipationResearch DesignResearch PersonnelCo-productionPatient and public involvementPPI

Identifiers

PMID30770732
PMCPMC6377726

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.