ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
The 'Public' in Public Involvement: A Call to Centre Frontline Staff Voices in Health Workforce Research.
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
Public involvement, or patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE), is widely embedded in health and care research and is valued for its moral, ethical, and methodological contributions. However, its application in workforce research raises important questions about the voices that might be missing from the 'public' when research's primary object of inquiry is healthcare staff, organisations, and systems, rather than patients and service users. This viewpoint explores tensions arising from the extension of standardised public involvement requirements, which were originally developed for research where patients and service users are the primary target of focus, into workforce-focused studies. We argue that while patient and public perspectives remain crucial, the lived experience and voices of frontline staff are often under-recognised in existing involvement frameworks, including those used in NIHR domestic programmes, as they are not fully accommodated within either public involvement or stakeholder engagement activities. We therefore call for greater clarity, flexibility, and, where appropriate, expansion in how public involvement is conceptualised and operationalised in workforce research, to better centre the voices of frontline staff. Rather than offering definitive solutions, we invite debate and future research on how public involvement can be made more meaningful, proportionate, and fit-for-purpose in health and care workforce research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This viewpoint article is written by researchers in the health and care workforce, PPIE, and community engagement, and a public contributor with interest and experience of involvement in health and care workforce research. We drew on our respective perspectives and experience to shape the framing and arguments presented in this viewpoint.
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.