Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41048006›Full record

SynthesisPsychological medicine2025

Facilitators of and barriers to patient and public involvement in mental health research within university settings: a systematic review and meta-synthesis.

Jo Evans, Caroline Da Cunha Lewin, Hannah Fabian, Mahveen Alam, Pamela Calder, Rosie Hill, Ezekiel Khayri, Sarah Markham, Angela Sweeney, Til Wykes

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. How Lived Experience Advisory Groups Contribute to the Design and Conduct of Mental Health Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    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

10 authors.

Jo EvansMaudsley Biomedical Research Centre, https://ror.org/0220mzb33King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3738-9366
Caroline Da Cunha LewinService User Research Enterprise, https://ror.org/0220mzb33King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2840-8732
Hannah FabianMaudsley Biomedical Research Centre, https://ror.org/0220mzb33King's College London, London, UK.
Mahveen AlamLived Experience Working Group.
Pamela CalderLived Experience Working Group.
Rosie HillLived Experience Working Group.
Ezekiel KhayriLived Experience Working Group.
Sarah MarkhamLived Experience Working Group.ORCID 0000-0002-8755-5935
Angela SweeneyService User Research Enterprise, https://ror.org/0220mzb33King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6020-7490
Til WykesMaudsley Biomedical Research Centre, https://ror.org/0220mzb33King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5881-8003

Funding

NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre NIHR203318
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient and public involvement (PPI) increasingly features in the shaping, design, and conduct of mental health research. This review identifies and synthesizes evidence of barriers and facilitators of PPI in mental health research within university settings. The search strategy followed PRISMA guidance and involved keyword searches in eight peer reviewed databases, grey literature, hand searching two journals, requests to national mental health organizations, and backwards and forwards citation searching. We included primary mental health studies on patient and public involvement, with data on facilitators and barriers. Data were extracted capturing author, date and country of publication, study aim, participant and research team composition, data collection and analysis methods, and levels of PPI. Quality appraisal was conducted using the CASP Checklist for Qualitative Research, with an additional item on intersectionality. We conducted an inductive thematic analysis, before holding a peer-debriefing session with a lived experience working group. The final dataset included 51 articles that were either of a qualitative design or contained analyzed qualitative data. Barriers and facilitators were grouped around the following themes: the structure of the research environment, organizational culture, and individual needs. Good practice exists, but the wider research environment and power imbalances within universities constrain PPI. For PPI in mental health research to reach its full potential, the redistribution of power, building capacity for all, the provision of safe working environments, and widening inclusion in the research process are necessary. This review involved researchers with lived experience of mental ill health.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationMental HealthPatient ParticipationHumansMental DisordersQualitative ResearchUniversitiesCo-productionLived experience involvementMental healthOrganisational changePatient and public involvementPsychiatryPsychologyResearch practiceService user involvement

Identifiers

PMID41048006
PMCPMC12527515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.