Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33974718›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2021

Patient and public involvement in care home research: Reflections on the how and why of involving patient and public involvement partners in qualitative data analysis and interpretation.

Rachel Stocker, Katie Brittain, Karen Spilsbury, Barbara Hanratty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Evaluating Process and Outcomes of Public Involvement in Applied Health and Social Care Research: A Rapid Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Migrants Living in the United Kingdom and Their Perceptions of Participation in Health Research: A Mixed-Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Public Involvement to Enhance Care Home Research; Collaboration on a Minimum Data Set for Care Homes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. My child is growing and now? Exploring the environmental needs of children with congenital Zika syndrome according to their caregivers' perceptions.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

Rachel StockerPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8189-2746
Katie BrittainPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Karen SpilsburySchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Barbara HanrattyPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited evidence for the impact of involving patients and the public (PPI) in health research. Descriptions of the PPI process are seldom included in publications, particularly data analysis, yet an understanding of processes and impacts of PPI is essential if its contribution to research is to be evaluated.

objectiveTo describe the 'how' of PPI in qualitative data analysis and critically reflect on potential impact.

methodsWe focus on the development and critical reflection of our step-by-step approach to collaborative qualitative data analysis (through a series of analysis workshops) in a specific care home study, and our long-term engagement model with patients and the public (termed PPI partners).

resultsAn open access PPI group, with multiple events over time, sustained broad interest in care home research. Recordings of interview clips, role-play of interview excerpts and written theme summaries were used in workshops to facilitate PPI partner engagement with data analysis in a specific study. PPI resulted in changes to data interpretation and was perceived to make the research process accessible. We reflect on the challenge of judging the benefits of PPI and presenting PPI in research publications for critical commentary.

conclusionsPatient and public involvement partners who are actively engaged with data analysis can positively influence research studies. However, guidance for researchers is needed on approaches to PPI, including appropriate levels and methods for evaluation. Without more systematic approaches, we argue that it is impossible to know whether PPI represents good use of resources and is generating a real impact.

Indexed as

Data AnalysisResearch DesignHumansPatient ParticipationResearch Personnelcommunity participationlong-term care facilitiespatient and public involvementqualitative researchresearch design

Identifiers

PMID33974718
PMCPMC8369083

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.