ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025
Patient and public involvement in neonatal research - experiences and insights from parents and researchers.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2025. 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.
- Parental Acceptability and Experiences of In-Bed Resuscitation at Birth: Findings From a Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 2026Article
- Parent Partnership in Neonatal Research: Facilitators, Barriers and Contributions of the Irish PADDINGToN Parent Advisory Group.Child: care, health and development · 2026Article
- Co-developing an intervention to facilitate safe and early transition to neonatal home care for very preterm infants: a mixed-method study evaluating the impact of patient and public involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInvolving parents in decisions about the care of their infant is common practice in most neonatal intensive care units. However, involvement is less common in neonatal research and a gap appears to exist in understanding the process of patient and public involvement. The aim of this study was to explore parents and researchers' experiences of patient and public involvement in a neonatal research project.
methodsA qualitative design was employed, consisting of two focus group interviews, one dyadic interview, and four individual interviews with parents and researchers. The interviews followed a semi-structured guide specific to both parents and researchers. Data were analysed using content analysis as described by Graneheim and Lundman.
resultsA total of nine parents and four researchers participated in the study. Seven themes were consolidated into three core concepts: Embracing the ethos and pathos of patient and public involvement, Finding the path to maximise meaningful involvement, and Becoming skilled in engaging patients and the public in research. The core concepts highlighted both similarities and differences, as well as challenges and facilitators, of the experiences of the patient and public involvement process.
conclusionPatient and public involvement in research was a mutually beneficial process, facilitating learning and reflective opportunities for parents and researchers. However, there were challenges that emphasised the need for rapport building between parents and researchers, valuing everyone's unique perspective and expertise, with clear communication and well-defined roles and goals. These insights offer a contribution for future patient and public involvement in health research.
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.