Evaluating public involvement in research design and grant development: Using a qualitative document analysis method to analyse an award scheme for researchers

被引：8

作者：

Baxter S. ^{[1
]}

Muir D. ^{[2
]}

Brereton L. ^{[3
]}

Allmark C. ^{[4
]}

Barber R. ^{[3
]}

Harris L. ^{[4
,5
]}

Hodges B. ^{[4
]}

Khan S. ^{[1
]}

Baird W. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] NIHR Research Design Service Yorkshire and Humber, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield

[2] NIHR RDS YH, University of Leeds, Leeds

[3] School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Regent Street, Sheffield

[4] Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield

来源：

Research Involvement and Engagement | / 2卷 / 1期

关键词：

Consumer involvement; Document analysis; Lay representation; Participatory research; Patient and public engagement; Patient and public involvement; Public involvement; Qualitative; Research design;

D O I：

10.1186/s40900-016-0027-x

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background A regional Research Design Service, funded by the National Institute for Health Research, introduced a small grant in 2008, to support public involvement (often known as patient and public involvement [PPI]) activities during the development of applications for research funding. Successful applicants are requested to submit a report detailing how the grant money was used, including a description of the aims and outcomes of the public involvement activities. The purpose of this study was to analyse the content of these reports. We aimed to find out what researcher views and experiences of public involvement activities were, and what lessons might be learned. Methods We used an innovative method of data analysis, drawing on group participatory approaches, qualitative content analysis, and Framework Analysis to sort and label the content of the reports. We developed a framework of categories and sub-categories (or themes and sub-themes) from this process. Results Twenty five documents were analysed. Four main themes were identified in the data: the added value of public involvement; planning and designing involvement; the role of public members; and valuing public member contributions. Within these themes, sub-themes related to the timing of involvement (prior to the research study/ intended during the research study), and also specific benefits of public involvement such as: validating ideas; ensuring appropriate outcomes; ensuring the acceptability of data collection methods/tools and advice regarding research processes. Other sub-themes related to: finding and approaching public members; timing of events; training/ support; the format of sessions; setting up public involvement panels: use of public contributors in analysis and interpretation of data; and using public members to assist with dissemination and translation into practice. Conclusions The analysis of reports submitted by researchers following involvement events provides evidence of the value of public involvement during the development of applications for research funding, and details a method for involving members of the public in data analysis which could be of value to other researchers The findings of the analysis indicate recognition amongst researchers of the variety in potential roles for public members in research, and also an acknowledgement of how involvement adds value to studies. © 2016 Baxter et al.

引用

共 17 条

[1]

Boote J., Telford R., Cooper C., Consumer involvement in health research: A review and research agenda, Health Policy, 61, pp. 213-236, (2002)

[2]

Carter P., Beech R., Coxon D., Thomas M., Jinks C., Mobilising the experiential knowledge of clinicians, patients and carers for applied health-care research, Contemporary Soc Sci: J Acad Soc Sci, (2013)

[3]

Staley K., Exploring impact: Public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research, Eastleight: INVOLVE, (2009)

[4]

Boote J., Baird W., Beecroft C., Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: A narrative review of case examples, Health Policy, 95, pp. 10-23, (2010)

[5]

INVOLVE, Budgeting for Involvement: Practical Advice on Budgeting for Actively Involving the Public in Research Studies. MHRN and INVOLVE: Eastleigh, 2013

[6]

Green G., Rein M., Building research capital to facilitate research, Health Res Pol Syst, 11, (2013)

[7]

Walker D., Pandya-Wood R., Can research development bursaries for patient and public involvement have a positive impact on grant applications? A UK-based small-scale service evaluation, Health Expect, (2013)

[8]

Boote J.D., Twiddy M., Baird W., Birks Y., Clarke C., Beever D., Supporting public involvement in research design and grant development: A case study of a public involvement award scheme managed by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Design Service (RDS), Health Expect, (2013)

[9]

Hsiu-Fang H., Shannon S.E., Qual Health Res, 15, pp. 1277-1288, (2005)

[10]

Ritchie J., Lewis J., Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers, (2003)

← 1 2 →