ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2022
The views of people living with chronic stroke and aphasia on their potential involvement as research partners: a thematic analysis.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing and Applying a Usability Testing Methodology for a Website With Survivors of Stroke and Caregivers: Tutorial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- A global multilingual cocreation of aphasia priority topics through patient and public involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Article
- Enhancing Description and Interpretation of Qualitative Interviews With People With Intellectual Disabilities Through Nonverbal and Paraverbal Data Collection and Analysis.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026Article
- From measures to meaning: a case study on co-defining aphasia recovery outcomes with patient experts.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Social Participation When Aging With an Early-Onset Neurological Disability: Protocol for Descriptive Qualitative Research.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Patient engagement strategies in digital health interventions for cancer survivors: A scoping review.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement in an evidence synthesis project: description of and reflection on involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- A scoping review of patient and public involvement in empirical stroke research.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2024Article
- Development and evaluation of a stroke research Public Patient Involvement Panel.HRB open research · 2024Article
- The development of the People with Aphasia and Other Layperson Involvement (PAOLI) framework for guiding patient and public involvement (PPI) in aphasia research.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Cypriot Healthcare Professionals' Knowledge and Skills When Interacting With Patients With Aphasia in Clinical Settings.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient and Public Involvement (PPI) is the active partnership between researchers, patients and laypeople in the process of creating research. PPI in stroke aphasia research aims to ensure equal opportunities for informed decision-making and guarantee democratic representation of patient partners within the research team. Yet, little is known about the factors that hinder and/or promote the autonomous involvement of people with aphasia in stroke and aphasia PPI projects. This study aimed to explore the views and perspectives of people who live with chronic stroke, with and without aphasia, with experience in research prior to stroke, on their potential involvement as research partners.
methodsThe research team included a PPI partner with chronic stroke-induced aphasia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted online with people with chronic stroke (n = 8), four with aphasia and four without. Interviews were subject to thematic analysis.
resultsInductive thematic analysis generated four themes: (1) the kinds of Restrictions that make involvement in research difficult, (2) the preferred levels and ways of Involvement during the research process, (3) the Support required for active and collaborative involvement, and (4) the Impact of their involvement and how it benefits the study's outcomes.
conclusionPeople experiencing chronic stroke and aphasia are willing to be involved as PPI partners if the research team provides the necessary support. Recommendations for researchers to consider before commencing co-produced research with people with stroke and aphasia are provided.
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.