ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Meaningful public involvement: changing research institutions toward epistemic justice.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- Bridging Lived and Expert Experience: A Qualitative Study Exploring Lived-Experience Experts' and Researchers' Experiences of Public Engagement in Cancer Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Dialogue matters. Exploring Deaf people's research experiences in Poland.Journal of deaf studies and deaf education · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public and patient involvement and engagement (PPIE) in research is increasingly expected and often formally required by the sponsors. However, creating and sustaining conditions for meaningful PPIE can be challenging. It requires efforts of all involved parties. While much attention is given for the ethical inclusion of individuals as research participants, their collaboration with researchers and design of accessible research processes, there is a question of how research institutions can support PPIE. We argue for comprehensive changes within research institutions to facilitate meaningful PPIE practice. These changes should include institutional culture and attitudes toward the public members involved in research, to foster meaningful encounters between people with different forms of knowledge and life experience, such as professionally trained researchers and members of marginalized social groups. In this study, we propose a framework of institutional changes for PPIE, which focuses on their sociocultural and epistemic features. We explore the context of PPIE and possible risks related to disregarding public members as owners of valid knowledge. We use the
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.