ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024
What matters to you? Public and patient involvement in the design stage of research.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical Practices for Gaining Access for Research with Deaf Communities in South Africa: A Case of South African Sign Language.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the impact of patient and public involvement on doctoral students in palliative dementia care research.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Stakeholders' perspectives on communicating biosecurity to encourage behavior change in farmers.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPublic and patient involvement is critical to ensure that research is relevant and addresses what matters most to the person through co-production. Involvement at the design stage where ideas for research are developed prior to formal ethical approval, can positively influence the direction of research design, methods, and outcomes. Although ethical approval is not required at this stage, being ethically conscious is imperative to prevent unwarranted unethical practices. To ensure this, the public and patient intervention at the design stage of a doctoral research project was benchmarked against Pandya-Woods 10 ethically conscious standards and the INVOLVE values and principles framework. Ethical approval was also gained for publication. MAIN BODY: Patient and public involvement was undertaken with two diverse patient and public groups as an agenda item in their regular Teams meeting. Thoughts on the research project, the timeline, what matters most to the individuals in the group with regarding the design and outcomes from the research, the best method for data collection for public research, and next steps were discussed.
conclusionPublic and patient involvement had a positive influence on the design and outcomes of a doctoral research proposal and held the researcher accountable for impact of the research on the public. Positive changes to the research from working with public and patients exploring 'what matters to you' included: An ontological change in the way that the research was conducted, identification of some main themes to run as a thread throughout the research, development of content for an international scoping review, identification of the best method for data collection for patient research, and accountability of the researcher to write a plain English summary at the beginning of each thesis chapter, and a summary report at the end for dissemination.
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.