Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40102999›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025

A commentary on ophthalmic patients co-designing a new tool to better understand their hospital letters.

Dayyanah Sumodhee, Kristina Venning, Ismail Moghul, Thomas Wemyss, Rishi Ramessur, Mohammed Abbas, Estelle Ioannidou, Helen Baker, Quang Nguyen, Cong Wang and 3 more

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

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 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. Article
  2. 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

13 authors.

Dayyanah SumodheeMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK. d.sumodhee@nhs.net.
Kristina VenningThe Guide Dog for the Blind Association, Burghfield Common, Hillfields, Reading, Berkshire, RG7 3YG, UK.
Ismail MoghulMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Thomas WemyssDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Rishi RamessurMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Mohammed AbbasMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Estelle IoannidouMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Helen BakerMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Quang NguyenMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Cong WangUCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, 11-43 Bath Street, London, London, EC1V 9EL, UK.
Konstantinos BalaskasMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Nikolas PontikosMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.
Peter ThomasMoorfields Eye Hospital, NHS Foundation Trust, 162 City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK.

Funding

Moorfields Eye Charity GR001479, 2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

​​Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) is recognised by the National Institute for Health and Care Research in the UK as crucial for high-quality outcomes with numerous benefits for patients. Patient and public contributors can provide both personal knowledge and lived experiences which complement the perspectives of the team. In this commentary, we share our experiences of facilitating a project, Explain.Health, to co-design a digital platform to help patients better understand their hospital letters by explaining medical terms. We describe the stages in the formation of the PPIE group, the stages in the co-design process and the next steps for the project. We reflect on PPIE of the project, including lessons learned for future PPIE work in building new digital platforms. Important considerations for this PPIE work include: (1) ensuring each public contributor feels listened to and understands how their involvement contributes to the design of the platform, (2) providing regular and clear communication and (3) offering adequate support to public contributors (appropriate formatting of resources for visually impaired contributors, incentives, assistance to use the meeting platform) to establish an inclusive and considerate approach. These findings can inform future PPIE plans for stakeholders involved in similar projects.

Indexed as

Co-designHospital lettersOphthalmologyPublic involvement

Identifiers

PMID40102999
PMCPMC11921715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.