Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39425447›Full record

Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2024

Patient and Public Involvement in Research Evaluating Integrated Care for People Experiencing Homelessness: Findings From the PHOENIx Community Pharmacy Pilot Randomised-Controlled Trial.

Andrew McPherson, Vibhu Paudyal, Richard Lowrie, Helena Heath, Jane Moir, Natalie Allen, Nigel Barnes, Hugh Hill, Adnan Araf, Cian Lombard and 8 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Andrew McPhersonPharmacy Services, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Scotland, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9961-2338
Vibhu PaudyalFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4173-6490
Richard LowriePharmacy Services, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Scotland, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6440-9089
Helena HeathNHS Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundations Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Jane MoirPharmacy Services, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Scotland, UK.
Natalie AllenSIFA Fireside, Birmingham, UK.
Nigel BarnesNHS Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundations Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Hugh HillSimon Community Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Adnan ArafNHS Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundations Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Cian LombardPharmacy Services, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Scotland, UK.
Steven RossSimon Community Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Sarah TearneBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7944-2917
Parbir JagpalSchool of Pharmacy, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Versha CheedBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6713-0913
Shabana AkhtarNHS Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundations Trust, Birmingham, UK.
George ProvanSimon Community Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
Andrea WilliamsonGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8981-9068
Frances S MairGeneral Practice and Primary Care, School of Health and Wellbeing, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9780-1135

Funding

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research scheme under commissioned call stream '20/56 Community Pharmacies' [Grant award ID: NIHR133060]. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Neither the study funder nor the sponsor had any role in the study design, collection, management, analysis and interpretation of data; writing of the report; and the decision to submit the report for publication. Health Services and Delivery Research Programme. NIHR133060, Vibhu Paudyal; NIHR133060, Richard Lowrie.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is a paucity of research on and a limited understanding of patient and public involvement (PPI) in the context of research in homelessness and, in particular, direct involvement of people with lived and living experience of homelessness (PEH) as expert advisors. We aim to report on outcomes and reflections from lived experience advisory panel (LEAP) meetings and PPI activities, held throughout the study lifecycle of a pilot randomised-controlled trial (RCT) focused on evaluating integrated health and practical support for PEH.

methodsCommunity Pharmacy Homeless Outreach Engagement Non-medical Independent prescribing Rx (PHOENIx Community Pharmacy RCT) is an integrated health and social care intervention for people experiencing homelessness who present to community pharmacy. Intervention includes weekly support from a pharmacist prescriber and a third sector support worker for up to 6 months. PPI activities undertaken throughout the study were documented, including outcomes of LEAP meetings. Outcome reporting followed Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 Short Form (GRIPP2-SF).

resultsIn total, 17 members were recruited into the LEAP; six meetings (three in two study sites) were held. PPI input was also received through representation from homelessness third sector organisation staff as study co-applicants and core membership in the trial steering committee. Together, the PPI activities helped shape the study proposal, design of study materials, data analysis and dissemination materials. LEAP panel members offered valuable input via their experience and expertise into the delivery and refinement of interventions. Although longitudinal input was received from some LEAP members, ensuring repeat attendance in the pre-planned meetings was challenging.

conclusionPeople who face social exclusion and marginalisation can provide highly valuable input as equal partners in co-design and delivery of interventions seeking to improve their health and well-being. Fluid membership and flexible methods of seeking and incorporating advice can offer pragmatic approaches to minimising barriers to continued involvement in research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study reports findings and learning relevant to involvement of people with lived and living experience of homelessness as advisors in a research study. It is important for researchers to offer fluid memberships and use diverse methods to receive input from lived experience members, as traditional PPI methodology may be insufficient to ensure inclusivity. Staff and volunteers from third sector organisations were important PPI partners who bring their experience based on frontline service provision, often as the first port of call for people experiencing severe and multiple disadvantage.

trial registrationISRCTN88146807.

Indexed as

Ill-Housed PersonsPatient ParticipationAdultCommunity ParticipationCommunity Pharmacy ServicesDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot Projectshealth inequalityhomelessnessintegrated carepatient and public involvementpharmacist independent prescriberthird sector organisation

Identifiers

PMID39425447
PMCPMC11489131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.