Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32022356›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2020

Patient and public involvement facilitators: Could they be the key to the NHS quality improvement agenda?

Sarah Todd, Christine Coupland, Raymond Randall

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Emotion in public involvement: A conceptual review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Responsibilities and capabilities of health engagement professionals (HEPs): Perspectives from HEPs and health consumers in Australia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  12. Patient and public involvement facilitators: Could they be the key to the NHS quality improvement agenda?Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sarah ToddCentre for Professional Work & Society, School of Business & Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8961-1147
Christine CouplandCentre for Professional Work & Society, School of Business & Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Raymond RandallCentre for Professional Work & Society, School of Business & Economics, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Loughborough University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveResearch into patient and public involvement (PPI) has not examined in detail patient and public involvement facilitators' (PPIFs) roles and activities. This study analysed PPIFs' roles using qualitative data gathered from three different UK health-care organizations.

designThematic analysis was used to examine cross-sectional data collected using a mixed-methods approach from three organizations: a mental health trust, a community health social enterprise and an acute hospital trust. The data set comprised of 27 interviews and 48 observations.

findingsPatient and public involvement facilitators roles included the leadership and management of PPI interventions, developing health-care practices and influencing quality improvements (QI). They usually occupied middle-management grades but their PPIF role involved working in isolation or in small teams. They reported facilitating the development and maintenance of relationships between patients and the public, and health-care professionals and service managers. These roles sometimes required them to use conflict resolution skills and involved considerable emotional labour. Integrating information from PPI into service improvement processes was reported to be a challenge for these individuals.

conclusionsPatient and public involvement facilitators capture and hold information that can be used in service improvement. However, they work with limited resources and support. Health-care organizations need to offer more practical support to PPIFs in their efforts to improve care quality, particularly by making their role integral to developing QI strategies.

Indexed as

Quality ImprovementState MedicineCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPatient ParticipationQuality of Health Carepatient and public involvementpatient and public involvement facilitatorsquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID32022356
PMCPMC7104637
OpenAlexW3004509418

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.