Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42728631›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026

Expertise or representation: What gives people with lived experience authority and legitimacy in involvement in research?

Kristina Staley, Lynn Laidlaw

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. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Kristina StaleyTwoCan Associates, Ross on Wye, UK. Kristina@twocanassociates.co.uk.
Lynn Laidlaw, Whitley Bay, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The involvement of people with lived experience makes research relevant and useful to the people it intends to help. How we conceptualise involvement influences every aspect of our approach to it. Over many years, the authors have sometimes witnessed or directly experienced problems caused by conceptualising involvement as being the same as (1) democracy, (2) stakeholder engagement, (3) qualitative research, or (4) "lay" engagement. We see these as distinct activities with different purposes to involvement. While representation (standing in for someone else) is important in these activities, we argue it is not required of people involved in research. We conceptualise involvement as a form of mutual learning. In particular, researchers learn from people's experiential knowledge, which is knowledge based on the individual's unique experience, but nonetheless similar to others. This knowledge becomes expertise because it enables people with lived experience to solve problems researchers have with their research. We therefore conclude that the success and quality of involvement depends on involving people with expertise that is relevant to the context. Our concern is that the authority and legitimacy of the contributions of people with lived experience is sometimes misunderstood to be dependent on their representativeness, rather than their expert knowledge. We have seen and experienced that this can lead to negative impacts on the research, and on the individuals involved, especially in terms of the emotional labour required to challenge researchers' conceptualisations of involvement. We also note that practices to support diversity and inclusion can sometimes be confused with ensuring that an involved group is approaching statistical representation of a population. While we see these as different objectives, we believe all research-related activities need to be inclusive of diverse people. Overall we conclude that a greater understanding of the value of expertise based on experiential knowledge, would help take the onus off individuals to be representative, and give them the authority and legitimacy to speak on their own behalf. The responsibility for successful involvement then shifts to the wider research system to ensure that researchers are seeking, and adequately supporting the involvement of diverse people with relevant expertise.

Indexed as

PatientPatient and public involvementPeople with lived experiencePublic involvement

Identifiers

PMID42728631
PMCPMC13570545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.