ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Establishing a Public Involvement Network for Chronic Pain Research in the United Kingdom: Lessons Learned.
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. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe Consortium to Research Individual, Interpersonal and Social Influences in Pain (CRIISP) is a 4-year UK university collaboration investigating how thoughts and feelings, personal relationships and lifestyle can affect chronic pain. Patient and public involvement in research recognises that researchers' conceptions of health and illness can be enriched and sense-checked by those of people experiencing a health condition. Published literature reports a gap in meaningful patient and public involvement in research into chronic pain, for example, during early study design. Input in this formative stage aimed to ensure the research proposed had a patient-centred focus which may benefit study implementation. We describe how the authors sought to address this gap and established a diverse public involvement (PI) network to support the CRIISP research.
methodsThirty-six adult public contributors were appointed to work alongside the research teams. Lessons learned are presented under the themes: optimising collaborative working, recruitment of public contributors, supporting public involvement throughout CRIISP and the retention of public contributors. Throughout this paper, we refer to the term 'public involvement' rather than 'patient and public involvement' in accordance with the NIHR definition which incorporates people with a range of experiences.
resultsWorking in partnership with our public contributors, we have embedded PI throughout a chronic pain research programme using an innovative and collaborative process.
conclusionThis model may inform others to maximise the potential of PI within their research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The paper reports the collaboration between public contributors with a lived experience of chronic pain and the Consortium to Research Individual, Interpersonal and Social influences in Pain (CRIISP) researchers, by means of a large public involvement network.
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.