Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39648476›Full record

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

How Do We Get the Public Into Public Health Research? Learnings and Key Recommendations From Initiating a Community Involvement Project Scheme.

Carmel McGrath, Gemma Lasseter, Noreen Hopewell-Kelly, Emma Anderson, Ellen Brooks-Pollock, Hannah Christensen, Sarah Denford, Rosie Essery, Shoba Dawson, Evelyn Schiller and 5 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Public Involvement in the Evaluation of Local Government Public Health Interventions in the UK: Lessons From PHIRST Insight.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Public Involvement in a Systematic Review Project: Reporting Our Approach Using the ACTIVE Framework.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    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

15 authors.

Carmel McGrathNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7777-2904
Gemma LasseterNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Noreen Hopewell-KellyDivision of Population Medicine, Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Centre, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Emma AndersonNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Ellen Brooks-PollockNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Hannah ChristensenNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Sarah DenfordNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Rosie EsseryPrimary Care Research Centre, School of Primary Care, Population Science and Medical Education, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Shoba DawsonSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Evelyn SchillerNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Taru SilvonenPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7159-5337
Christina StokesNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Amy ThomasPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Clare ThomasNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Andy GibsonNIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation, Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Funding

This work was supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere are many recognised benefits of public involvement, including more relevant research. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the existing health inequalities and disparities in access to care and treatment for under-served groups, necessitating meaningful and sustainable approaches to engaging them in health research. However, there is limited guidance to suggest what groundwork and processes are necessary for initiating such projects. This paper outlines the practical approaches taken to initiate a community involvement project scheme and offers key recommendations from this work.

methodsThe National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit established a community involvement scheme in 2021, funding four community involvement projects enabling researchers to engage with under-served communities. Reflections were captured through regular quarterly meeting group discussions, meeting notes and email correspondence.

resultsThe paper presents the steps taken to initiate a scheme that provided funding for a diverse range of projects working with under-served communities. The projects demonstrated the value of allocating time to build relationships and trust, maintaining flexibility, and providing short-term benefits such as remuneration and training to the community. DISCUSSION: This paper has highlighted the need for research organisations to allocate funding and resources within their infrastructures for building trusting relationships with community leaders and communities.

conclusionThis paper has outlined the steps undertaken to engage with under-served communities to bridge the gap between public health research and those communities. We present key recommendations to guide future initiatives aspiring to engage under-served communities in health research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Public contributors have been involved in all of the four community involvement projects mentioned in this paper. Two public contributors are also co-authors and have provided input to the writing and review of this manuscript.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationCOVID-19HumansPandemicsPublic HealthSARS-CoV-2community involvementlearningPPIpublic health researchpublic involvementreciprocityUK Standards for Public Involvement

Identifiers

PMID39648476
PMCPMC11625873

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.