Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30957902›Full record

ArticleBioethics2019

Patient and public involvement: Two sides of the same coin or different coins altogether?

Matthew S McCoy, Jonathan Warsh, Leah Rand, Michael Parker, Mark Sheehan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioethics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Bioethics committee approvals in multicentre laryngology research across Europe: the European Laryngological Society's consensus on legal basis and quality assurance.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. What justifies public engagement in health financing decisions?Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Matthew S McCoyDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5273-3877
Jonathan WarshThe Ethox Centre, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Leah RandThe Ethox Centre, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Michael ParkerThe Ethox Centre, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7054-4711
Mark SheehanThe Ethox Centre, Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7191-901X

Funding

Wellcome Trust 203132Wellcome Trust 203132/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient and public involvement (PPI) has gained widespread support in health research and health policy circles, but there is little consensus on the precise meaning or justifications of PPI. We argue that an important step towards clarifying the meaning and justification for PPI is to split apart the familiar acronym and draw a distinction between patient and public involvement. Specifically, we argue that patient involvement should refer to the practice of involving individuals in health research or policy on the basis of their experience with a particular condition, while public involvement should refer to the practice of involving individuals in health policy or research based on their status as members of a relevant population. Analyzing cases from the UK, Australia, and the USA, we show how our proposed distinction can deliver much needed clarity to conversations on PPI, while guiding the development and evaluation of future PPI-based policies.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationPolicy MakingStakeholder ParticipationHealth PolicyHealth Services ResearchHumanspatient involvementpublic engagementpublic involvement

Identifiers

PMID30957902
PMCPMC7116097

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.