Public involvement in health and social sciences research: A concept analysis

被引:49
作者
Hughes, Mel [1 ]
Duffy, Catherine [1 ]
机构
[1] Bournemouth Univ, Dept Social Work & Social Sci, R404,Royal London House,Christchurch Rd, Bournemouth BH1 3LT, Dorset, England
关键词
co-production; health; participatory research; PPI; public and patient involvement; social sciences; social work; user-controlled research; user-led research; USER INVOLVEMENT; MENTAL-HEALTH; PATIENT; IMPACT; PARTICIPATION;
D O I
10.1111/hex.12825
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Research funding bodies have significantly increased emphasis on the need for public involvement in research with the requirement to evidence effective methods and approaches to achieving this. Specific definitions and approaches within published research remain tokenistic and vague. Objective: The concept analysis explores and clarifies the nature and meaning of public involvement in health and social sciences research and identifies operational definitions which can be used to guide, develop and evaluate public involvement in research activity. Search strategy: A literature search was conducted using online databases. Systematic literature reviews and broader studies on the impact of PPI were included as was grey literature such as guidance from INVOLVE and research funding bodies. Limits were set to papers published in the last 10 years and in the English language. A concept analysis framework adapted from Rodgers (Concept Development in Nursing: Foundations, Techniques and Applications. London, UK: Saunders; 2000) and Walker and Avant (Strategies for Theory construction in Nursing. Boston, MA: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2005) was applied. Main results: Five operational definitions were developed from the concept analysis: undefined involvement; targeted consultation; embedded consultation; co-production; and user-led research. Typical examples of each approach were identified from the literature. Defining attributes included having clear and agreed meaning and purpose for any involvement; reciprocal relationships; and value and recognition of the expertise of all those involved. Conclusions: The authors argue the need for researchers to more explicitly incorporate and evaluate details of approaches used. Impact of public involvement on a research study should be identified when reporting on findings to prevent tokenistic practices where involvement is viewed as secondary to the core research process.
引用
收藏
页码:1183 / 1190
页数:8
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   A patient and public involvement (PPI) toolkit for meaningful and flexible involvement in clinical trials – a work in progress [J].
Bagley H.J. ;
Short H. ;
Harman N.L. ;
Hickey H.R. ;
Gamble C.L. ;
Woolfall K. ;
Young B. ;
Williamson P.R. .
Research Involvement and Engagement, 2 (1)
[2]  
Baldwin Moyra Ann, 2008, Nurse Res, V15, P49
[3]   'But is it a question worth asking?' A reflective case study describing how public involvement can lead to researchers' ideas being abandoned [J].
Boote, Jonathan D. ;
Dalgleish, Mary ;
Freeman, Janet ;
Jones, Zena ;
Miles, Marianne ;
Rodgers, Helen .
HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2014, 17 (03) :440-451
[4]  
Bourdieu Pierre., 1984, DISTINCTION SOCIAL C
[5]   Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review [J].
Brett, Jo ;
Staniszewska, Sophie ;
Mockford, Carole ;
Herron-Marx, Sandra ;
Hughes, John ;
Tysall, Colin ;
Suleman, Rashida .
HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2014, 17 (05) :637-650
[6]   The mental health strategy for Europe: Why service user leadership in research is indispensable [J].
Callard, Felicity ;
Rose, Diana .
JOURNAL OF MENTAL HEALTH, 2012, 21 (03) :219-226
[7]   Putting the parity into service-user participation: An integrated model of social justice [J].
Davies, Kate ;
Gray, Mel ;
Webb, Stephen A. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE, 2014, 23 (02) :119-127
[8]   What Difference Does Patient and Public Involvement Make and What Are Its Pathways to Impact? Qualitative Study of Patients and Researchers from a Cohort of Randomised Clinical Trials [J].
Dudley, Louise ;
Gamble, Carrol ;
Preston, Jennifer ;
Buck, Deborah ;
Hanley, Bec ;
Williamson, Paula ;
Young, Bridget .
PLOS ONE, 2015, 10 (06)
[9]   Involving older people in health research [J].
Fudge, N. ;
Wolfe, C. D. A. ;
Mckevitt, C. .
AGE AND AGEING, 2007, 36 (05) :492-500
[10]   Climbing the "Ladder of Participation": Engaging Experiential Youth in a Participatory Research Project [J].
Funk, Anna ;
Van Borek, Natasha ;
Taylor, Darlene ;
Grewal, Puneet ;
Tzemis, Despina ;
Buxton, Jane A. .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH-REVUE CANADIENNE DE SANTE PUBLIQUE, 2012, 103 (04) :E288-E292