Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41410212›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025

Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Secondary Data Analysis: Protocol for a Targeted Review.

Jonathan Broomfield, Elizabeth Fisher, Eleanor Booth, Samina Begum, Cecily Henry, Julie Roberts, Laura J Gray, PPI‐SMART Team

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 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. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Secondary Data Analysis: Protocol for a Targeted Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    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

8 authors.

Jonathan BroomfieldDivision of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1846-2150
Elizabeth FisherDivision of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Eleanor BoothUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Samina BegumPublic Contributor, UK.
Cecily HenryPublic Contributor, UK.
Julie RobertsDivision of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Laura J GrayDivision of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
PPI‐SMART Team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPatient and public involvement (PPI) is increasingly recognised as a vital component of health research, promoting inclusivity, relevance and impact. While PPI is well-integrated into primary research, its role in secondary data analysis, where researchers work with pre-existing data, remains underexplored. This targeted review aims to assess the prevalence, characteristics, and evolution of PPI in secondary data analysis studies, with a focus on articles published in The British Medical Journal (The BMJ) across selected years. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This targeted literature review will examine original research articles published in The BMJ in 2014, 2019, and 2024. These years were selected to capture trends before and after the journal's 2015 mandate requiring PPI statements. Studies will be included if they utilise secondary data to address original research questions. A comprehensive search strategy using PubMed and a defined set of keywords related to secondary data will be employed. Articles will be screened independently by two reviewers at both title/abstract and full-text stages. Data extraction will focus on study characteristics, PPI inclusion and outcomes influenced by PPI. Quantitative analysis will assess the prevalence and trends of PPI, while qualitative description of PPI statements will be used to summarise current practice and identify successful, effective practices. A representative sample of reviewed PPI statements will be shared in text and audio formats with six public contributors, who will assess them using a Likert scale and provide feedback on good and poor PPI practices during a facilitated meeting. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this review involves only published literature, ethical approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication, academic conferences and community engagement events to inform best practices and promote meaningful PPI in secondary data research. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Six public contributors will be involved in the review process, ranking PPI statements and providing feedback on the level of PPI input to the studies as well as the level of reporting in the articles (detailed in Section 3.4). Additionally, two public contributors reviewed and are co-authors on this protocol, and we will invite another three public contributors to review any subsequent publications or materials produced by this review. We will adhere to the UK Standards for Public Involvement, ensuring we provide adequate support and inclusive opportunities for public contributors (e.g., by sending materials in text and audio formats in advance of meetings) and including them as co-authors where appropriate to amplify their voices and maximise their impact on the project. Public contributors will be reimbursed in accordance with NIHR INVOLVE guidelines.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationData AnalysisPatient ParticipationHumansResearch DesignSecondary Data AnalysisUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID41410212
PMCPMC12712864

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.