ArticleBMJ open2021
Evaluation of a patient and public involvement training programme for researchers at a large biomedical research centre in the UK.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- The benefits, challenges, and best practice for patient and public involvement in evidence synthesis: A systematic review and thematic synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Exploring staff and students' understanding and experience of Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) in an Irish University.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- When xenotransplantation enters the conversation: reflections on public involvement in research on a novel and controversial technology.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Supporting researchers to involve patient partners in health service research: developing and assessing the feasibility and acceptability of a co-produced training programme for researchers.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Experiences of patients and public partners in codesign of Lynch Choices™: an evaluation study using the Patient Engagement In Research Scale (PEIRS-22).Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- An international cross-sectional study of dementia researchers' own perspectives on patient and public involvement.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- From theory to practice in training health researchers in patient and public involvement: a scoping review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2025Article
- Experiences, impact, and enablers of involving young people and family caregivers in developing reporting guidelines for paediatric randomised trials: a case study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Transforming Community-Based Rehabilitation Services: A National Redesign Using Experience-Based Co-Design.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement and engagement: Do we need an 'ethical anchor'?Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Evaluating a grant development public involvement funding scheme: a qualitative document analysis.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Using Participatory Action Research to Redirect Tinnitus Treatment and Research-An Interview Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Patient and public involvement in preclinical and medical research: Evaluation of an established programme in a Discovery-Based Medical Research Institute.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Embedding formal and experiential public and patient involvement training in a structured PhD programme: process and impact evaluation.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Opportunities to enhance consumer and community engagement training for researchers and healthcare providers: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Partnering with patients and caregivers to enrich research and care in kidney disease: values and strategies.Clinical kidney journal · 2023Review
- Public and patient involvement: a survey on knowledge, experience and opinions among researchers within a precision oncology European project.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- The role of patient and public involvement in rapid qualitative studies: Can we carry out meaningful PPIE with time pressures?Research involvement and engagement · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo design, deliver and evaluate a programme of training workshops for biomedical researchers aimed at building confidence and skills in actively involving patients and the public (PPI) in research.
designA bespoke programme of training workshops in PPI aimed at researchers.
settingA large National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre in London and several partner organisations.
participants721 scientists, clinicians and research managers attending dedicated training in PPI at a major London NHS (National Health Service)-university partnership.
interventionsA programme of 72 training workshops, designed to build practical skills and confidence for researchers working with patients and the public in research, was delivered at a major research-active NHS:university partnership. An iterative approach was taken to the programme, with the content of the workshops continually reviewed and refreshed to respond to the needs of researchers. Surveys before, immediately following and 6 months after training investigated the impact on researchers' confidence and skills in PPI work, and the kind of PPI they subsequently carried out.
resultsTraining brought about immediate marked increases in researchers' self-reported confidence to carry out PPI activities within their research, and in their knowledge of good practice. The evaluation indicates that workshop attendees were more likely to involve patients in their research following training. Researchers tended to involve patients and the public in a range of areas, including input to study design and patient information, in particular.
conclusionsWhen positioned within a broader organisational strategy for PPI in research, such training has an important role to play in progressing PPI in a major research partnership. Training appeared to provide the confidence needed to carry out PPI which enabled further development of confidence and skills. Involving researchers who have attended the training in the ongoing development of the programme and bringing in patients to the training programme are key next steps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.