Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34585482›Full record

Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022

The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation.

Kathryn Greenwood, Sam Robertson, Evelin Vogel, Claire Vella, Thomas Ward, Alison McGourty, Cat Sacadura, Amy Hardy, Mar Rus-Calafell, Nicola Collett and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Using a Person-Centred Approach to Adapt a Digital Therapy for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (COMPASS-IBD).Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Trial
  4. Meta-Research on the Science of Lived Experience Engagement in Mental Health and Substance Use Health Research: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Lived experience and family engagement in psychiatry research: A scoping review of reviews.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Exploring the impact of engagement in mental health and substance use research: A scoping review and thematic analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Patient-centred clinical trial design.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2022
    Review
  18. 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

18 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Kathryn GreenwoodSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7899-8980
Sam RobertsonSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK.
Evelin VogelSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK.
Claire VellaSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK.
Thomas WardDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7608-5755
Alison McGourtySussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK.
Cat SacaduraSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Worthing, UK.
Amy HardyDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6044-6093
Mar Rus-CalafellSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2293-3875
Nicola CollettOxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Richard EmsleyDepartment of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1218-675X
Daniel FreemanOxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2541-2197
David FowlerSchool of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5806-2659
Elizabeth KuipersDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0041-7338
Paul BebbingtonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6030-7456
Graham DunnCentre for Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science CentreManchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7091-3161
Philippa GaretyDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5637-1340
SlowMo Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) team
King's College London · GBSussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust · GBOxford Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Sussex · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR300051Department of Health NIHR-RP-2014-05-003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe SlowMo study demonstrated the effects of SlowMo, an eight-session digitally supported reasoning intervention, on paranoia in a large-scale randomized-controlled trial with 362 participants with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis.

aimThe current evaluation aimed to investigate the impact of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in the SlowMo study.

methodPPI members were six women and three men from Sussex, Oxford and London with experience of using mental health services for psychosis. They received training and met at least 3-monthly throughout the project. The impact of PPI was captured quantitatively and qualitatively through (i) a PPI log of recommendations and implementation; (ii) written subjective experiences of PPI members; (iii) meeting minutes; and (iv) outputs produced.

resultsThe PPI log revealed 107 recommendations arising from PPI meetings, of which 87 (81%) were implemented. Implementation was greater for recruitment-, data collection- and organization-related actions than for dissemination and emergent innovations. Qualitative feedback revealed impacts on study recruitment, data collection, PPI participants' confidence, knowledge, career aspirations and society more widely. Outputs produced included a film about psychosis that aired on BBC primetime television, novel webpages and journal articles. Barriers to PPI impact included geography, travel, funding, co-ordination and well-being. DISCUSSION: A future challenge for PPI impact will be the extent to which peer innovation (innovative PPI-led ideas) can be supported within research study delivery. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Planned Patient and Public Contribution in SlowMo comprised consultation and collaboration in (i) design, (ii) recruitment, (iii) qualitative interviews and analysis of service users' experiences of SlowMo therapy and (iv) dissemination.

Indexed as

Mental Health ServicesPsychotic DisordersFemaleHumansLondonMalePatient ParticipationReferral and ConsultationCognitive Behavioural Therapydigital healthimpactmobile applicationsparanoiaPatient and Public Involvement (PPI)

Identifiers

PMID34585482
PMCPMC8849241
OpenAlexW3202042892

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.