Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40676654›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025

Creating the conditions for meaningful and effective PPIE in community-based public health research: learning from a UK-wide lived experience panel.

Mohasin Ahmed, Jennifer McLean, Cam Donaldson, Michael J Roy, Rachel Baker

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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Exploring the influence of long COVID upon self-identity: a systematic literature review.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Educators, Not Influencers: Health Content Creator Perspectives on Research Recruitment Collaboration.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Mohasin AhmedGlasgow Centre for Population Health, Third Floor, Olympia Building, Bridgeton Cross, Glasgow, G40 2QH, UK. Mohasin.ahmed@glasgow.ac.uk.
Jennifer McLeanGlasgow Centre for Population Health, Third Floor, Olympia Building, Bridgeton Cross, Glasgow, G40 2QH, UK.
Cam DonaldsonYunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, M201, George Moore Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK.
Michael J RoyStirling Management School, 3 A41 Cottrell Building, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK.
Rachel BakerYunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, M201, George Moore Building, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR 129118
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch has been criticised for its extractive nature, often neglecting to reciprocate benefits to the communities involved. Addressing this, Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) has emerged as a crucial approach, engaging community members as research partners rather than subjects of research. However, it is important that PPIE is carried out in a meaningful way to avoid tokenism and extraction from communities. This paper reflects on the learning from the PPIE approach of the CommonHealth Assets (CHA) project, which partnered with 14 community-led organisations (CLOs) across the UK to evaluate their impact on health and wellbeing in their communities. MAIN BODY: The CHA Lived Experience Panel (LEP), comprised of around 13 individuals from the project-partnered CLOs, played a pivotal role in informing and influencing the research process to enhance the relevance and impact of the CHA project. Following community engagement resources, we aimed to create a supportive and inclusive environment for meaningful PPIE. Through the evaluation of the CHA LEP, this paper reports on its successes and limitations to offer recommendations on creating the conditions for meaningful and effective PPIE in community-based public health research. From our evaluation, we found that adequately resourcing PPIE is crucial to its success. PPIE activities require a dedicated facilitator with expertise in working with diverse stakeholders to advocate for the sustained integration of PPIE into the research team, and to support contributors in their engagement. Being adaptive and responsive in your approach, utilising continuous evaluation and accountability in the process is also key. For contributors to have a meaningful impact, they must be engaged from the funding application stage and throughout the early stages of the project. Contributors must work closely with members of the research team at all levels, with researchers committing to facilitating authentic involvement of contributors, accessing training to work with diverse communication needs where required.

conclusionOur findings demonstrate that meaningful and effective PPIE requires a strong, sustained commitment to valuing and integrating patient/public perspectives in research. We add to the knowledge base in this area by offering a practical example of implementing PPIE in community-based research settings.

Indexed as

Community-led organisations (CLOs)Lived experienceMeaningful engagementPatient and Public Involvement (PPIE)PowerPublic health researchRelationship buildingTrust

Identifiers

PMID40676654
PMCPMC12273268

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.