ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026
Development of a 4Pi national involvement standards-based questionnaire to evaluate patient and public involvement.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Patient and public involvement and engagement in co-designing guidance for mental health professionals supporting neurodivergent children and young people in child and adolescent mental health services.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Correction: Development of a 4Pi national involvement standards-based questionnaire to evaluate patient and public involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvaluation of patient and public involvement (PPI) is crucial to ensuring it is conducted with quality. However, determining how best to evaluate the experience of those doing involvement activities remains challenging, particularly given the complex landscape of diverse terminology and wide range of methods. There is a need for robust and accessible tools, grounded in established standards, that reflect the perspectives of patients and public contributors involved in PPI activities. To address this, we developed a questionnaire (4Pi Questionnaire) based on the 4Pi National Involvement Standards, a project that developed a framework around good practice and measurement, monitoring and evaluation of involvement activities.
methodsThe questionnaire was developed through an iterative process involving literature review, experts’ input and extensive consultation with PPI contributors. Initial items were generated deductively from the five domains of the 4Pi National Involvement Standards framework (i.e., Principle, Purpose, Presence, Process and Impact). Subsequent versions of the questionnaire were refined using a face validity workshop, a Questionnaire Appraisal System, and focus group-based cognitive interviewing (CI) with PPI contributors. Feedback focussed on clarity, relevance, accessibility and questionnaire structure. There was a final round of testing to assess accessibility and usability.
resultsThe 4Pi Questionnaire is a structured measure designed to capture experiences of involvement in diverse contexts across healthcare and research. The questionnaire consists of an introduction followed by 31 items grouped into two sections A and B. Section A (“Your experience of involvement”) includes 22 items relating to a single recent involvement activity and cover the five domains of the 4Pi National Involvement Standards framework. Respondents rate their agreement with 19 statements using a five-point Likert scale, and answer two open-ended questions. Section B (“About you”) collects demographic information. Completion time is approximately 15–30 min. Involvement of subject-matter experts and PPI contributors ensured clarity of language, relevance of each question, and usability of the questionnaire.
conclusionsGrounded in the 4Pi National Involvement Standards, the 4Pi Questionnaire provides an accessible and acceptable tool to measure the experiences and perceptions of patients and public contributors doing involvement activities. Systematically developed with and for people with lived experience, the 4Pi Questionnaire addresses a gap in the availability of standardised, meaningful measures and supports efforts to embed inclusive involvement practices across healthcare and research settings.
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.