Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31428457›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2019

Reflections on qualitative data analysis training for PPI partners and its implementation into practice.

Alison Cowley, Margaret Kerr, Janet Darby, Pip Logan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Bridging Lived and Expert Experience: A Qualitative Study Exploring Lived-Experience Experts' and Researchers' Experiences of Public Engagement in Cancer Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Evaluation of a 'Research Methods' Training Course for Novice Lived Experience Researchers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Evaluation of Public Involvement in Doctoral Research Using a Four-Dimensional Theoretical Framework.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 'Down to the person, the individual patient themselves': A qualitative study of treatment decision-making for shoulder pain.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Involving an individual with lived-experience in a co-analysis of qualitative data.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. An exercise intervention for people with serious mental illness: Findings from a qualitative data analysis using participatory theme elicitation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  16. GPs' decisions about prescribing end-of-life anticipatory medications: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020
    Article
  17. 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.

Alison Cowley1Institute of Nursing & Midwifery Care Excellence, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Hucknall Road, Nottingham, NG5 1PB UK.
Margaret KerrPatient and Public Involvement Partner C/O School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK.
Janet Darby2Division of Rehabilitation, Ageing and Well-being, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK.
Pip Logan2Division of Rehabilitation, Ageing and Well-being, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, NG7 2UH UK.

Funding

Department of Health ICA-CDRF-2016-02-015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

plain english summaryService users should be involved in every part of the research process, including analysis of qualitative research data such as interviews and focus groups. To enhance their participation, confidence and contributions, training and support for both the 'professional' researcher and lay member of public is essential. Historically this has taken a number of forms from short 1 day training sessions through to training spread out over several months. There currently is limited guidance on the quantity and content of such training sessions for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Partners. This paper discusses and explores the content and delivery of qualitative analysis training held over two sessions of 3 h duration to members of a University PPI group. The training was designed by experienced qualitative researchers and PPI partners based on available literature and research expertise. Training included the theory of qualitative research methods, and practical qualitative analysis coding skills. These skills were developed through the use of 'mock' interviews which participants practiced coding in supportive group sessions. Their feedback on the training is provided. One of the PPI partners subsequently went onto code data with a researcher working on a funded research study, and has reflected on both the training sessions and the subsequent analysis of the data. These reflections have been supplemented by reflections of the researcher who worked alongside the PPI partner, revealing that the process challenged perspectives and helped them view data through a service users eyes. A positive working relationship was central to this. ABSTRACT:

backgroundService users should be involved in every part of the research process to ensure that interventions are fit for those whom they are intended to help. Involving service users in analysing qualitative data such as focus groups and interviews has been recognised as particularly valuable. Older people have frequently been less involved in these initiatives. A wide range of training programmes have been proposed but there is currently limited guidance on the quantity and content of training sessions to support training Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Partners. This paper discuses and explores the content and delivery of qualitative data analysis training to members of a University PPI Group. BODY: Existing literature on PPI in qualitative data analysis was reviewed by the research team and an outline programme was designed. This comprised of two three hour sessions held at an easily accessible venue familiar to members of the PPI group. The course included theories behind qualitative research methodology and methods, what is coding and how to code independently and as part of a research team using Thematic Analysis. A mock research question was generated and two mock interviews were completed, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. This provided participants with real life experience of coding data. The session was positively reviewed and said to be interesting, enjoyable and provided a good overview of qualitative analysis. One of the PPI partners subsequently went onto code data with a researcher working on a funded research study, and has reflected on both the training sessions and the subsequent analysis of the data. These reflections have been supplemented by reflections of the researcher who worked alongside the PPI, revealing that the process challenged perspectives and helped them view data through a service users eyes. A positive working relationship was central to this.

conclusionsFeedback suggests that the training enabled PPI partners to become active members of the research team in qualitative data analysis. There is a need for further research into the optimal amount of training needed by PPI's to participate as partners in qualitative analysis.

Indexed as

Co-productionPPIQualitative researchTraining

Identifiers

PMID31428457
PMCPMC6694461

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.