Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41886695›Full record

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.

Yingxi Zhao, Justin Aunger, Hilary Garrett, Paul Hewitson, Alun Davies, Manish Pareek, Sassy Molyneux

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

7 authors.

Yingxi ZhaoUniversity of Oxford Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4937-4703
Justin AungerNIHR Midlands Patient Safety Research Collaboration, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6975-4570
Hilary GarrettPublic Contributor, National Institute for Health and Care Research and Health Data Research UK, Lancaster, UK.ORCID 0009-0006-3972-7989
Paul HewitsonUniversity of Oxford Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, UK.
Alun DaviesThe Global Health network, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7784-9000
Manish PareekDivision of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Sassy MolyneuxUniversity of Oxford Nuffield Department of Medicine, Oxford, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR153324National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR303168National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR306576NIHR Midlands Patient Safety Research Collaboration : Leicester Biomedical Research Centres : Applied Research Collaboration East MidlandsWellcome Trust 338666/Z/25/ZWellcome Trust 338666/Z/25/Z MESH 2025‐2027
6 · The paper itself

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

Community ParticipationHealth Services ResearchHealth WorkforceFrontline WorkersHumanscommunity engagementco‐productionhealth services researchpublic participation

Identifiers

PMID41886695
PMCPMC13045428

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.