ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
Public Involvement in the Evaluation of Local Government Public Health Interventions in the UK: Lessons From PHIRST Insight.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe value of public involvement in research is increasingly recognised, bringing specific lived experience to inform research from the outset. Despite known benefits, barriers to meaningful public involvement remain and further studies are needed to understand how it can be embedded throughout public health research evaluations across diverse contexts.
aimTo understand how public involvement has been embedded across 10 evaluations of local government public health initiatives.
methodsThis study focuses on public involvement in 10 studies of local government public health interventions undertaken by an academic team funded through the NIHR PHIRST scheme. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with three groups: public partners (n = 12), local government partners (n = 13) and members of the academic research team (n = 12), to share their experiences and reflections on embedding public involvement within this research context.
resultsSeveral challenges to embedding public involvement were identified including studies' geographical locations, tight timelines, clarifying the role and expectations of public contributors, as well as the provision of training and support. Participants also noted how practices had developed over the 5-year funding period. All participant groups highlighted the positive impact of public involvement, not only on individual studies, but also the reciprocal benefits to public partners and changes to longer-term practices within local governments. However, awareness of the impact of public involvement could be improved by more formalised recording and feedback mechanisms.
conclusionOur findings reinforce the importance of continued reflection, resource investment and structured processes to ensure meaningful public involvement is implemented, developed, evaluated and sustained over time. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our public partners, Christina Stokes, Sian Harding, Rashmi Kumar and Barbara Harrington, made significant contributions to the study design and data collection materials (developing and refining the topic guides) developed for this study.
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.