Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41467106›Full record

ArticleWellcome open research2025

Evaluation of the Establishment of a Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement Group to Support Clinical Trials in Pakistan: Protocol for a Mixed-Methods Study.

Arishay Hussaini, Monaza Khan, Nikhat Ahmed, Madiha Hashmi, Shehla Farooq, Adnan Masood, Srinivas Murthy, Saima Saleem, Zahyd Shuja, Shahnaz Zaman and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wellcome open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Arishay HussainiCritical Care Research Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6359-6070
Monaza KhanPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Nikhat AhmedCritical Care Research Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Madiha HashmiCritical Care Research Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7332-0692
Shehla FarooqPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Adnan MasoodPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Srinivas MurthyThe University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Saima SaleemPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Zahyd ShujaPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Shahnaz ZamanPatient and Public Involvement and Engagement Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.
Arjen M DondorpCentre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5190-2395
Timo TolppaCritical Care Research Group, Ziauddin University, Karachi, Sindh, 75000, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4119-7335

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in research is a collaboration between researchers, patients, and the public, enhancing research acceptability, relevance, and impact. There is a growing prevalence of PPIE in high-income country research; however, its integration in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) remains poorly understood. Recognising this gap, the Ziauddin University Clinical Trials Unit in Karachi, Pakistan, launched a dedicated PPIE initiative in 2022. This study evaluates the engagement process and experiences of patient and public members and researchers to identify barriers and facilitators to participation within the PPIE group. Methods: The evaluation uses an explanatory sequential mixed-method design. First, the Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PPEET) questionnaire will be administered online to group members, coordinators, and senior institutional leads. Insights from questionnaires will be further explored during semi-structured interviews, with questions guided by the Patient Engagement in Research (PEIR) framework, supplemented with analysis of project documentation. Study activities will be conducted in both English and Urdu. The study has been co-designed with PPIE members and is co-led with a public partner. Findings will highlight areas for improvement, inform best practices, and guide the development of more effective engagement strategies. Outcome: Although focused on a single group, this evaluation lays the groundwork for understanding PPIE practices in LMIC contexts. It provides valuable insights into developing equitable partnerships and improving patient-centred research. This study contributes to a growing body of knowledge, offering practical guidance for implementing PPIE in settings with unique socioeconomic challenges and cultural realities. The findings are expected to benefit the local research community and similar initiatives globally, particularly in regions with comparable challenges.

Indexed as

Clinical TrialCo-designCritical CareEngagementLow- and Middle-Income CountriesMixed-Method StudyPatient and Public Involvement

Identifiers

PMID41467106
PMCPMC12744197

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.