ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024
Experiences of participant and public involvement in an international randomized controlled trial for people living with dementia and their informal caregivers.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2024. 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.
- Involving People With Dementia in Research: Contributions, Barriers and Evaluation From a Meta-Synthesis and Qualitative Interview Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Family Carer Involvement in Dementia Care Research: A Scoping Review and Expert Consultation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Matters of the Heart: Co-Creating a Peer-Led Social Health Intervention for People Living with Dementia.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Experience, Process, and Impact of Involving Informal Caregivers of People With Dementia as Public Contributors to Inform the Development of a Complex Intervention: A Mixed-Methods Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Lessons learned from the participatory development of a framework to actively involve people living with dementia, individuals from their social networks, and healthcare professionals in systematic reviews: the DECIDE-SR study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Patient and public involvement in neonatal research - experiences and insights from parents and researchers.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Ethical disclosure of biomarkers for Alzheimer risk in Latin American participants.Frontiers in dementia · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study was initiated and co-designed by a Participant and Public Involvement (PPI) group attached to HOMESIDE, a randomized controlled trial that investigated music and reading interventions for people living with dementia and their family caregivers across five countries: Australia, Germany, Norway, Poland, and the UK. The aim was to capture experiences of PPI across the five countries, explore the benefits and challenges of PPI in dementia research, and identify contributions made to the study.
methodsWe surveyed PPI members and academic researchers who collaborated on the HOMESIDE study. The survey was co-designed through consultation with PPI members and academics, alongside a small scoping literature review. Survey questions covered four topics: (1) expectations for PPI, (2) perceived contributions of PPI to the research study, (3) benefits and challenges of PPI, and (4) recommendations for future PPI in dementia research.
resultsThere were 23 responses, representing 50% of the PPI members (n = 16) and 29% of academics (n = 7). PPI was found to be beneficial to the research and individuals involved. Contributions to the research included supporting recruitment and publicity, advising on the design of participant-facing materials, guiding the design and delivery of the interventions, and identifying cultural differences affecting research delivery. PPI members benefited from building connections, sharing experiences and receiving support, learning about dementia and research, and gaining new unexpected experiences. Academics learned about the realities of living with dementia, which they felt informed and grounded their work. Several challenges were identified, including the need for clear expectations and objectives, inconsistency of PPI members across research stages, limitations of meeting online versus in-person, scheduling difficulties, and language barriers.
conclusionsThis study identifies important considerations for implementing PPI within dementia studies and international healthcare research more broadly. Our findings guided the development of five recommendations: (1) involve PPI members as early as possible and throughout the research process; (2) create a space for constructive criticism and feedback; (3) have clear tasks, roles, and expectations for PPI members; (4) involve PPI members with a diverse range of experiences and backgrounds; and (5) embed infrastructure and planning to support PPI.
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.