Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42576244›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026

Benefits and challenges of a Patient & Public Involvement (PPI) peer researcher.

Nigel Westwood, Judith Tanner, Lyn Brierley-Jones, Ann Cheng, Melissa Rochon, Ricky Vaja, Jeremy Dearling, Keith Wilson, Gavin J Murphy, Luke J Rogers

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

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. 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

10 authors.

Nigel WestwoodPatient and Public Representative, London, UK.
Judith TannerSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Lyn Brierley-JonesSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Medicine of Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Ann ChengDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Melissa RochonSurveillance and Innovation Unit, Directorate of Infection, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Ricky VajaSt Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Jeremy DearlingPatient and Public Representative, London, UK.
Keith WilsonPatient and Public Representative, London, UK.
Gavin J MurphyDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0976-1482
Luke J RogersAcademic Cardiovascular Unit, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK. lukerogers1@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6240-0120

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research NIHR202620
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Involving a patient and public involvement (PPI) peer researcher with lived experience in clinical research is a relatively new concept and to our knowledge, has not been described in adult cardiac surgery. The integration of a PPI peer researcher with a lived experience of a surgical site infection (SSI) was an exploratory component of work associated with an NIHR-funded, mixed-methods study evaluating patients and caregivers' preferences for post-discharge SSI monitoring. The PPI peer researcher worked alongside an academic colleague, participating in patient observations, qualitative interviews, and thematic analysis. Their shared and personal experiences appeared to encourage some participants to disclose nuanced concerns that differed in tone and content from those shared with the academic researcher, offering an additional perspective to inform collaborative reflection. This approach did, however, present a series of practical challenges: inconsistent hospital approvals, fragmented site-based training requirements, and unclear approval processes created barriers and increased the workload of the academic team. This commentary aims to describe the practical feasibility, perceived benefits and challenges encountered when integrating a PPI peer researcher into this cardiac surgical research programme.

Indexed as

Cardiac surgeryPassportPatient and Public InvolvementPeer researcherPPISurgical site infection

Identifiers

PMID42576244
PMCPMC13455246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.