ArticlePloS one2023
Digital technology and patient and public involvement (PPI) in routine care and clinical research-A pilot study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Generating evidence using electronic alerts during routine care: a fully automated randomized controlled trial of oral fluid restriction in acute heart failure (THIRST alert trial).European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Involvement of People With Cancer and Informal Caregivers in the Development Process of a New Set of Quality of Life Questionnaires.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Using artificial intelligence to predict patient outcomes from patient-reported outcome measures: a scoping review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement in the co-design and assessment of unobtrusive sensing technologies for care at home: a user-centric design approach.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement workshop to shape artificial intelligence-supported connected asthma self-management research.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Article
- Using the UK standards for public involvement to evaluate the public involvement sections of annual reports from NIHR managed research centres.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient and public involvement (PPI) has growing impact on the design of clinical care and research studies. There remains underreporting of formal PPI events including views related to using digital tools. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of hosting a hybrid PPI event to gather views on the use of digital tools in clinical care and research.
methodsA PPI focus day was held following local procedures and published recommendations related to advertisement, communication and delivery. Two exemplar projects were used as the basis for discussions and qualitative and quantitative data was collected.
results32 individuals expressed interest in the PPI day and 9 were selected to attend. 3 participated in person and 6 via an online video-calling platform. Selected written and verbal feedback was collected on two digitally themed projects and on the event itself. The overall quality and interactivity for the event was rated as 4/5 for those who attended in person and 4.5/5 and 4.8/5 respectively, for those who attended remotely.
conclusionsA hybrid PPI event is feasible and offers a flexible format to capture the views of patients. The overall enthusiasm for digital tools amongst patients in routine care and clinical research is high, though further work and standardised, systematic reporting of PPI events is required.
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.