Cargando…

Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research

OBJECTIVES: Public and patient involvement (PPI) is required at all stages of research by many funding bodies such as the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Given the high priority of PPI within NIHR programmes and the associated costs, it is important that the process of involvement and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stocks, Susan Jill, Giles, Sally J, Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh, Campbell, Stephen M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4360721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25770228
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006390
_version_ 1782361572324147200
author Stocks, Susan Jill
Giles, Sally J
Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh
Campbell, Stephen M
author_facet Stocks, Susan Jill
Giles, Sally J
Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh
Campbell, Stephen M
author_sort Stocks, Susan Jill
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Public and patient involvement (PPI) is required at all stages of research by many funding bodies such as the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Given the high priority of PPI within NIHR programmes and the associated costs, it is important that the process of involvement and impact of PPI on health services research is evaluated. We aimed to develop a tool to quantitatively evaluate the quality of PPI in research from a PPI participant's perspective in order to inform the researchers about absolute level of quality (cross-sectional aspect) and changes in quality over time (longitudinal aspect). SETTING: A primary care patient safety translational research centre. PARTICIPANTS: The 12 members of the Research User Group (RUG) of Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre. INTERVENTIONS: By their own choice each RUG member supported a specific research theme. The level of involvement varied from commenting on documents through to designing their own research projects. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES PLANNED: Measure absolute score and change in score over time in a nine-point Likert score within individuals. Compare Likert scores before undertaking PPI with scores after PPI activities. Evaluate the usefulness of a questionnaire based on a theoretical framework of personal and research factors. RESULTS: The questionnaire had an acceptable to good level of internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.74–0.81). The majority of the individuals met their initial expectations (11/12) and scored high across all factors. There was no significant change over time in the aggregate score over all factors and all individuals, but there were differences within individuals and factors. A ceiling effect limited the questionnaire's usefulness to measure increasing scores. CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire has been useful in evaluating the early stages of a PPI group and may be generalisable to another setting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4360721
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43607212015-03-25 Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research Stocks, Susan Jill Giles, Sally J Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh Campbell, Stephen M BMJ Open Research Methods OBJECTIVES: Public and patient involvement (PPI) is required at all stages of research by many funding bodies such as the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Given the high priority of PPI within NIHR programmes and the associated costs, it is important that the process of involvement and impact of PPI on health services research is evaluated. We aimed to develop a tool to quantitatively evaluate the quality of PPI in research from a PPI participant's perspective in order to inform the researchers about absolute level of quality (cross-sectional aspect) and changes in quality over time (longitudinal aspect). SETTING: A primary care patient safety translational research centre. PARTICIPANTS: The 12 members of the Research User Group (RUG) of Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre. INTERVENTIONS: By their own choice each RUG member supported a specific research theme. The level of involvement varied from commenting on documents through to designing their own research projects. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES PLANNED: Measure absolute score and change in score over time in a nine-point Likert score within individuals. Compare Likert scores before undertaking PPI with scores after PPI activities. Evaluate the usefulness of a questionnaire based on a theoretical framework of personal and research factors. RESULTS: The questionnaire had an acceptable to good level of internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.74–0.81). The majority of the individuals met their initial expectations (11/12) and scored high across all factors. There was no significant change over time in the aggregate score over all factors and all individuals, but there were differences within individuals and factors. A ceiling effect limited the questionnaire's usefulness to measure increasing scores. CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaire has been useful in evaluating the early stages of a PPI group and may be generalisable to another setting. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4360721/ /pubmed/25770228 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006390 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Research Methods
Stocks, Susan Jill
Giles, Sally J
Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh
Campbell, Stephen M
Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
title Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
title_full Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
title_fullStr Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
title_full_unstemmed Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
title_short Application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
title_sort application of a tool for the evaluation of public and patient involvement in research
topic Research Methods
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4360721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25770228
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006390
work_keys_str_mv AT stockssusanjill applicationofatoolfortheevaluationofpublicandpatientinvolvementinresearch
AT gilessallyj applicationofatoolfortheevaluationofpublicandpatientinvolvementinresearch
AT cheraghisohisudeh applicationofatoolfortheevaluationofpublicandpatientinvolvementinresearch
AT campbellstephenm applicationofatoolfortheevaluationofpublicandpatientinvolvementinresearch