ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Challenges and Facilitators to Patient and Public Involvement In Stroke Research: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient and public involvement in the research process, despite its novelty and importance in enhancing the quality of studies, still has many unknown dimensions that need to be discovered and explained through qualitative research. Conducting qualitative research to understand experiences in newly emerging topics is challenging and can pose significant difficulties for researchers.
objectiveDevelopment of a directed qualitative content analysis study protocol to identify challenges and facilitators to patient and public involvement in stroke research.
designStudy protocol of qualitative content analysis.
methodThis study protocol outlines the step-by-step design for a directed qualitative content analysis. The study will use a directed approach, following the methodology proposed by Hsieh and Shannon (2005). Participants will be selected based on their experience or knowledge of involvement in the research process, including stakeholders such as researchers, people who are affected by stroke, caregivers, and healthcare providers in stroke research. Participants will be purposefully chosen for their willingness and ability to contribute. Data will be gathered through semi-structured in-depth interviews. The quality of the study will be ensured by applying the criteria established by Lincoln and Guba.
conclusionThis study protocol offers a comprehensive guide for conducting directed qualitative content analysis, outlining the research process step-by-step to aid researchers using similar methodologies. It addresses common language-related challenges and suggests solutions. The protocol emphasizes maintaining high research standards through specific criteria and provides a detailed discussion of ethical considerations. The authors advocate for publishing qualitative research protocols before implementation to improve research quality, foster ethical and integrated practices, and support novice researchers. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Stakeholder involvement was crucial in developing the interview guide. Feedback was gathered from six experts: three researchers (quantitative and qualitative fields), one stroke rehabilitation specialist, and two Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) experts. Their insights guided the research team in determining research areas, proposing participant recruitment strategies, addressing language barriers, and ensuring necessary details were provided for the study protocol.
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.