ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025
Developing theoretically grounded strategies to enable and promote patient and public involvement in implementation research studies.
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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A three-way partnership: reflections and lessons from co-producing social care research with practitioners, researchers and the public.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Implementation research has emerged as a branch of healthcare research. It studies methods to promote the application of research findings into practice, and, thus, to improve the quality and effectiveness of services and care. Patient and public involvement (PPI) in implementation research is a means of bridging research and practice. However, the progress to achieve greater involvement is slow. The reasons might include potential tensions when including perspectives of stakeholders with diverse skills, backgrounds and experiences, and the risk of reproducing paternalistic clinician-patient relationship tradition of healthcare research, which is incompatible with PPI.In this commentary we shared the PPI navigation approach that we used in a recent implementation research project, where eight patient and public partners attended three 1-hour sessions to discuss a specific implementation research methodology. On reflection, we categorised the approach into three strategies that aimed to empower patient and public partners and promote their senses of autonomy, relatedness and competence. According to the Basic Psychological Needs Theory, these are principal human needs, fulfilment of which may lead to higher motivation, performance, and well-being. We outlined the process of applying each strategy and used this and other theories to show why this can lead to positive partner and research outcomes. Two patient and public partners provided their perspectives about what worked and what could be further improved. The strategies can be used in future implementation studies, and we provide recommendations for the development of more strategies using the theory-based approach.
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.