52
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Frequency of reporting on patient and public involvement (PPI) in research studies published in a general medical journal: a descriptive study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          While documented plans for patient and public involvement (PPI) in research are required in many grant applications, little is known about how frequently PPI occurs in practice. Low levels of reported PPI may mask actual activity due to limited PPI reporting requirements. This research analysed the frequency and types of reported PPI in the presence and absence of a journal requirement to include this information.

          Design and setting

          A before and after comparison of PPI reported in research papers published in The BMJ before and 1 year after the introduction of a journal policy requiring authors to report if and how they involved patients and the public within their papers.

          Results

          Between 1 June 2013 and 31 May 2014, The BMJ published 189 research papers and 1 (0.5%) reported PPI activity. From 1 June 2015 to 31 May 2016, following the introduction of the policy, The BMJ published 152 research papers of which 16 (11%) reported PPI activity. Patients contributed to grant applications in addition to designing studies through to coauthorship and participation in study dissemination. Patient contributors were often not fully acknowledged; 6 of 17 (35%) papers acknowledged their contributions and 2 (12%) included them as coauthors.

          Conclusions

          Infrequent reporting of PPI activity does not appear to be purely due to a failure of documentation. Reporting of PPI activity increased after the introduction of The BMJ’s policy, but activity both before and after was low and reporting was inconsistent in quality. Journals, funders and research institutions should collaborate to move us from the current situation where PPI is an optional extra to one where PPI is fully embedded in practice throughout the research process.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A systematic review of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes research.

          We conducted a review of the peer-reviewed literature since 2003 to catalogue reported methods of stakeholder engagement in comparative effectiveness research and patient-centered outcomes research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PCORI Engagement Rubric: Promising Practices for Partnering in Research

            Engaging patients, caregivers, and other health care stakeholders as partners in planning, conducting, and disseminating research is a promising way to improve clinical decision making and outcomes. Many researchers, patients, and other stakeholders, however, lack clarity about when and how to engage as partners within the clinical research process. To address the need for guidance on creating meaningful stakeholder partnerships in patient-centered clinical comparative effectiveness research, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) developed the PCORI Engagement Rubric (Rubric).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: a narrative review of case examples.

              To review published examples of public involvement in research design, to synthesise the contributions made by members of the public, as well as the identified barriers, tensions and facilitating strategies. Systematic literature search and narrative review. Seven papers were identified covering the following topics: breast-feeding, antiretroviral and nutrition interventions; paediatric resuscitation; exercise and cognitive behavioural therapy; hormone replacement therapy and breast cancer; stroke; and parents' experiences of having a pre-term baby. Six papers reported public involvement in the development of a clinical trial, while one reported public involvement in the development of a mixed methods study. Group meetings were the most common method of public involvement. Contributions that members of the public made to research design were: review of consent procedures and patient information sheets; outcome suggestions; review of acceptability of data collection procedures; and recommendations on the timing of potential participants into the study and the timing of follow-up. Numerous barriers, tensions and facilitating strategies were identified. The issues raised here should assist researchers in developing research proposals with members of the public. Substantive and methodological directions for further research on the impact of public involvement in research design are set out. Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2018
                23 March 2018
                : 8
                : 3
                : e020452
                Affiliations
                [1 ] The BMJ , London, UK
                [2 ] departmentDepartment for Continuing Education , The University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [3 ] departmentHealth Experiences Institute, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Medical Sciences Division , University of Oxford , Oxford, UK
                [4 ] departmentWarwick Medical School , University of Warwick , Coventry, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Amy Price; aprice@ 123456bmj.com

                Dr. Snow died on 2 February 2017.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5200-7322
                Article
                bmjopen-2017-020452
                10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020452
                5875637
                29572398
                f8ccf048-33cd-4155-a9b4-8d1f5512502c
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 06 November 2017
                : 21 February 2018
                : 26 February 2018
                Categories
                Research Methods
                Research
                1506
                1730
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                public and patient involvement,research reporting,ppi
                Medicine
                public and patient involvement, research reporting, ppi

                Comments

                Comment on this article