ReviewBMJ open2025
Patient Bridge Role: a new approach for patient and public involvement in healthcare research programmes.
Review in BMJ open, 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.
- Inequalities in cancer diagnostic outcomes for patients with a learning disability: a retrospective cohort study in England.BMJ oncology · 2026Article
- Patients and Communities Shape Regional Health Research Priorities: A Participatory Study from South Tyrol, Italy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient and public involvement (PPI) in research involves an active collaboration between patients/members of the public and researchers in equal partnership. PPI in health research ensures the research benefits those most impacted by the research and is a well-established necessity of high-quality research. PPI for large programmes of work involving multiple studies frequently relies on a single PPI group that oversees the entire programme. We believe that this 'traditional' approach can negatively contribute to the power imbalance between researchers and PPI members, since PPI members have a very wide remit and are unable to embed themselves fully in all aspects of the research.
aimThe study aimed to evaluate a novel PPI approach, the 'Patient Bridge Role', designed to promote a more equal distribution of power between public collaborators and researchers in a large research programme. The Patient Bridge Role involves assigning specific public collaborators to each work package, facilitating deeper engagement and communication. MAIN ARGUMENT: The Patient Bridge Role addresses the limitations of traditional PPI. This approach requires clear role definitions and collaborative development of guidelines to ensure effective communication and shared decision-making. Despite initial challenges related to role clarity and boundaries, the Patient Bridge Roles successfully promoted a more balanced partnership between researchers and public collaborators.
conclusionsActive partnerships between public collaborators and researchers are critical to creating more relevant and higher quality research. Yet, there are many practical and conceptual barriers to this. The Patient Bridge Role offers a promising strategy for enhancing PPI in large research programmes.
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.