ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2023
Sharing space at the research table: exploring public and patient involvement in a methodology priority setting partnership.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community and stakeholder engagement in national priority setting and participatory research for HIV, Tuberculosis, and Malaria programs in Nepal.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Patient and public involvement in cancer care and research: the Indian perspective.Ecancermedicalscience · 2026Review
- Identifying research priorities for post-collision care in the United Kingdom: protocol for a road injury priority setting partnership.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement and engagement in methodology research: process, experiences, and recommendations from the SPIRIT- and CONSORT-Surrogate project.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Patients and Communities Shape Regional Health Research Priorities: A Participatory Study from South Tyrol, Italy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Lessons learned from building the kid's trial with an online children's and parents' research advisory group: a descriptive, qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Patient perspectives on surgical handover quality: a mixed-methods survey.Patient safety in surgery · 2025Article
- The People's Review protocol: planning an innovative study powered by the public.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Development of a User-Centred Chronic Care Model for Patients With Heart Failure in a Limited-Resource Setting: A Codesign Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Public and participant involvement as a pathway to inclusive dementia research.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025Article
- Lowe Syndrome and Me: a co-creation video series connecting patients, caregivers, and researchers.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Locum doctor working and quality and safety: a qualitative study in English primary and secondary care.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Article
- Article
- Involving parents of children treated for cancer in Sweden as public contributors to inform the design and conduct of an evaluation of internet-administered self-help for parents of children treated for cancer: a protocol.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Review
- Recommended characteristics and processes for writing lay summaries of healthcare evidence: a co-created scoping review and consultation exercise.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Youth and family involvement in the development of a plain language trial results communication tool: CommuniKIDS.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Effective approaches to public involvement in care home research: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPublic and patient involvement aims to improve research quality, relevance, and appropriateness. Despite an increasing evidence base on the influence of public involvement in health research, the role of involvement in methodology research (i.e. research that aims to enhance the quality and rigour of research) is less clear. Using a qualitative case study, we explored public involvement in a research priority-setting partnership in rapid review methodology (Priority III) to give practical insights to inform public involvement in priority-setting for future methodological research.
methodsParticipant observation, documentary analysis, interviews and focus groups were used to explore the processes of Priority III and identify the views and experiences of the participants of a steering group (n = 26) regarding public involvement in Priority III. We used a case study research design and conducted two focus groups with five public partners; one focus group with four researchers; and seven one-to-one interviews with researchers and public partners. Nine episodes of participant observation of meetings were conducted. All data were analysed using template analysis.
resultsThe findings of this case study present three themes and six subthemes: Theme 1 We all bring unique qualities to the table. Subtheme 1.1-Coming from different perspectives towards shared-decision making; Subtheme 1.2-Public partners bring pragmatism and grounding in reality; Theme 2 We need support and space at the table. Subtheme 2.1-Define and develop support needed for meaningful involvement; Subtheme 2.2-Creating safe space to listen, challenge and learn; Theme 3 We all benefit from working together. Subtheme 3.1-Reciprocity in mutual learning and capacity building; Subtheme 3.2-Relationships as partners in research, with a feeling of togetherness. Communication and trust, as inclusive ways of working, underpinned the partnership approach to involvement.
conclusionsThis case study contributes to knowledge on public involvement in research by explaining the supportive strategies, spaces, attitudes and behaviours that enabled a productive working partnership to develop between a team of researchers and public partners in this research context.
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.