Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40133960›Full record

ReviewResearch involvement and engagement2025

The People's Review protocol: planning an innovative study powered by the public.

Éle Quinn, Shoba Dawson, Jeremy Holt, Shahed Hossain, Patricia Logullo, Ann O'Brien, Maureen Smith, Derek Stewart, Shaun Treweek, Charlene Young and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Éle QuinnEvidence Synthesis Ireland, Discipline of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Galway, University Road, Galway, H91 TK33, Ireland. e.quinn34@universityofgalway.ie.
Shoba DawsonSheffield Centre for Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Jeremy HoltPublic Co-author, Galway, Ireland.
Shahed HossainBRAC James P. Grant School of Public Health, BRAC University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Patricia LogulloUK EQUATOR Centre, Centre for Statistics in Medicine (CSM), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Ann O'BrienDiscipline of Business Information Systems, J.E. Cairnes School of Business & Economics, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Maureen SmithPublic Co-author, Cochrane Consumer Network Executive & Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Derek StewartHonorary Professor, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Shaun TreweekAberdeen Centre for Evaluation, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Charlene YoungPublic Co-author, London, UK.
Chris NooneSchool of Psychology, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.
David MoherSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Sinéad M HynesDiscipline of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Galway, Galway, Ireland.

Funding

Health Research Board ESI-2021-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystematic reviews provide the best quality evidence about the effectiveness of health treatments. However, systematic reviews and the important role they play in healthcare are not well understood beyond the walls of academia and healthcare. Systematic reviews can help the public make more informed health choices, based on the best available evidence. The People's Review aims to provide an opportunity to members of the public to plan and complete a full systematic review online in a supportive and engaging manner. It will be a learning-by-doing experience to support the public's understanding of what reviews are, how they are done, why they matter, and how they can be used to support everyday health decisions.

methodsIn The People's Review the public will conduct a full systematic review, deciding the review question, planning the review, working on the parts of the review, and deciding how to share the review findings, in a 'learning by doing' process. The review will be conducted online in eight stages using Cochrane Crowd, an existing citizen science platform. The team working behind-the-scenes of The People's Review will design, produce, and share learning material to support the public's understanding at each stage of the review. DISCUSSION: Involving the public in a systematic review online will enable members of the public to understand and use systematic reviews in everyday health choices. It provides the public with a unique 'learning by doing' opportunity to get to grips with what systematic reviews are and how they are produced. This article describes how we plan to involve the public in The People's Review. It is not a protocol for the systematic review itself - this will be published separately once the project has commenced, and the public have decided the review question.

Indexed as

Citizen scienceEvidence-based healthcareEvidence synthesisHealth researchlearning by doingMaking sense of sciencePatient and public involvement (PPI)Public partnersSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40133960
PMCPMC11934685

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.