Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41339953›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2025

From theory to practice in training health researchers in patient and public involvement: a scoping review protocol.

Caline Jesus, Isabelly Cristina Rodrigues Regalado, Karolinne Souza Monteiro, Adriana Gomes Magalhães, Paula Silva de Carvalho Chagas, Christina D C M Faria, Vanessa Vega Córdova, Izaskun Álvarez-Aguado, Eve Namisango, Christopher Morris and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

11 authors.

Caline JesusGraduate Program in Decision and Health Models, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil.
Isabelly Cristina Rodrigues RegaladoGraduate Program in Physiotherapy, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Karolinne Souza MonteiroGraduate Program in Physiotherapy, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Adriana Gomes MagalhãesGraduate Program in Physiotherapy, Universidade Federal Do Rio Grande Do Norte, Natal, Brazil.
Paula Silva de Carvalho ChagasGraduate Program in Rehabilitation Sciences and Physical and -Functional Performance, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil.
Christina D C M FariaDepartment of Physical Therapy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Vanessa Vega CórdovaPontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso, Chile.
Izaskun Álvarez-AguadoUniversidad de Las Américas, Providencia, Chile.
Eve NamisangoAfrican Palliative Care Association, Kampala, Uganda.
Christopher MorrisPeninsula Childhood Disability Research Unit (PenCRU) and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula (PenARC), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Egmar LongoGraduate Program in Decision and Health Models, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil. egmarlongo@yahoo.es.ORCID 0000-0001-6263-1818

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient and public involvement (PPI) aims to increase the relevance and impact of research by ensuring that outcomes align with the real needs of those involved. In PPI, the public actively participates in all stages of research, which has been shown to improve research quality, empower participants, and enrich researchers' understanding of patients' and the public's lived experiences. However, implementing PPI poses a challenge for many researchers, making training essential as it provides the necessary skills to incorporate PPI meaningfully into their projects. Thus, this review aims to map existing PPI training programs in health research, identifying effective strategies that can be replicated, thereby contributing to the improvement of health research practices.

methodsThe scoping review will adhere to Arksey and O'Malley's six-step framework and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist, with results reported following the GRIPP2-Short Form. This review will follow the JBI guidelines for scoping reviews. A PPI group will be established to contribute to the interpretation and discussion of findings and will also be recognized as co-authors of the article. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Elsevier), EBM Reviews, CINAHL (EBSCO), Scopus, ERIC (EBSCO/ProQuest), Web of Science Core, HealthSTAR (Ovid), and Academic Search Complete. Gray literature searches will be conducted in ASSIA (ProQuest) and Google Scholar. The review will include full-text articles published with no language restrictions, focusing on PPI training programs for health researchers, with no publication date restrictions. Two independent reviewers will screen studies by title and abstract, followed by full-text review. DISCUSSION: The study aims to identify and systematize the approaches used in PPI training programs, providing a foundation to guide researchers in effective PPI implementation. This review may encourage health researchers to integrate PPI as an essential component throughout the research cycle, aligning studies more closely with patients' needs and experiences. Such alignment has the potential to directly inform public health policies, benefiting the target population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: 10.17605/OSF.IO/WBDPE.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationPatient ParticipationResearch PersonnelHumansResearch DesignScoping Reviews as TopicDoctoral researchersHealth researchersPatient and public involvementPatient engagementPatient participationPPI trainingResearch trainingScoping review

Identifiers

PMID41339953
PMCPMC12676871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.