'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory
Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a requirement for UK health and social care research funding. Evidence for how best to implement PPI in research programmes, such as National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), remains limited. T...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2019-05, Vol.14 (5), p.e0215953-e0215953 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e0215953 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | e0215953 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 14 |
| creator | Keenan, Julia Poland, Fiona Boote, Jonathan Howe, Amanda Wythe, Helena Varley, Anna Vicary, Penny Irvine, Lisa Wellings, Amander |
| description | Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a requirement for UK health and social care research funding. Evidence for how best to implement PPI in research programmes, such as National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), remains limited. This paper reports findings from an action research (AR) project called IMPRESS, which aims to strengthen PPI within CLAHRC East of England (EoE). IMPRESS combines AR with Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore PPI within diverse case study projects, identifying actions to implement, test and refine to further embed PPI.
We purposively selected CLAHRC EoE case study projects for in-depth analysis of PPI using NPT. Data were generated from project PPI documentation, semi-structured qualitative interviews with researchers and PPI contributors and focus groups. Transcripts and documents were subjected to abductive thematic analysis and triangulation within case. Systematic across case comparison of themes was undertaken with findings and implications refined through stakeholder consultation.
We interviewed 24 researchers and 13 PPI contributors and analysed 28 documents from 10 case studies. Three focus groups were held: two with researchers (n = 4 and n = 6) and one with PPI contributors (n = 5). Findings detail to what extent projects made sense of PPI, bought in to PPI, operationalised PPI and appraised it, thus identifying barriers and enablers to fully embedded PPI.
Combining NPT with AR allows us to assess the embeddedness of PPI within projects and programme, to inform specific local action and report broader conceptual lessons for PPI knowledge and practice informing the development of an action framework for embedding PPI in research programmes. To embed PPI within similar programmes teams, professionals, disciplines and institutions should be recognised as variably networked into existing PPI support. Further focus and research is needed on sharing PPI learning and supporting innovation in PPI. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0215953 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2225127629</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A585418430</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_ce759e033d224298b45ea6cab7d92d6a</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A585418430</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-7555b10f740f227d81cfd38afc9b54b4c37fe48368df6518dc34c0dc8da242913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk21r1TAUx4soTqffQDQgOAXvtUmaPuyFMMbUwXCiU1-GND1tc0mbmrR37hv7MTzd7sau7IUUmuTkd_4n5yQnip7ReEl5Rt-t3OR7ZZeD62EZMyoKwe9Fj2jB2SJlMb9_a74TPQ5hFceC52n6MNrhNM5TXiSPoj97P2HPAxlUCNA34AMJyljTN8T0ZGwBlx3-WjO8JeU0knMgrVoDwejEnfekBD-2gYyOBAswoNfePjlaKzupcVYZcIB-JKqvyDCV1mhE1s6uoZvN52ZsMZAiHhrjMB-cBFBet2TwrvGq62CfHCChR9zf2l2BHlGsdr6DipQX5DPOlDVBXaJfvNMQAjlrwfmLJ9GDWtkATzfjbvT9w9HZ4afFyenH48ODk4VOCzYuMiFESeM6S-KasazKqa4rnqtaF6VIykTzrIYk52le1amgeaV5ouNK55ViCSso341eXOkO1gW5uaQgGWOCsixlBRLHV0Tl1EoO3nTKX0injLw0ON9I5UejLUgNmSgg5rxis3peJgJUqlWZVQWrUoVa7zfRphKLoLGkXtkt0e2d3rSycWuJZ09TEaPA642Ad78mCKPsTNBgrerBTfO5OYspE4Ih-vIf9O7sNlSjMIH5djCunkXlgchFQvOEz2GXd1D4VdAZjS-6Nmjfcniz5YDMCL_HRk0hyONvX_-fPf2xzb66xbagLL5mZ6f5BYVtMLkCtXcheKhvikxjOTfkdTXk3JBy05Do9vz2Bd04XXcg_wv3UjUj</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2225127629</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Keenan, Julia ; Poland, Fiona ; Boote, Jonathan ; Howe, Amanda ; Wythe, Helena ; Varley, Anna ; Vicary, Penny ; Irvine, Lisa ; Wellings, Amander</creator><contributor>Solari, Alessandra</contributor><creatorcontrib>Keenan, Julia ; Poland, Fiona ; Boote, Jonathan ; Howe, Amanda ; Wythe, Helena ; Varley, Anna ; Vicary, Penny ; Irvine, Lisa ; Wellings, Amander ; Solari, Alessandra</creatorcontrib><description>Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a requirement for UK health and social care research funding. Evidence for how best to implement PPI in research programmes, such as National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), remains limited. This paper reports findings from an action research (AR) project called IMPRESS, which aims to strengthen PPI within CLAHRC East of England (EoE). IMPRESS combines AR with Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore PPI within diverse case study projects, identifying actions to implement, test and refine to further embed PPI.
We purposively selected CLAHRC EoE case study projects for in-depth analysis of PPI using NPT. Data were generated from project PPI documentation, semi-structured qualitative interviews with researchers and PPI contributors and focus groups. Transcripts and documents were subjected to abductive thematic analysis and triangulation within case. Systematic across case comparison of themes was undertaken with findings and implications refined through stakeholder consultation.
We interviewed 24 researchers and 13 PPI contributors and analysed 28 documents from 10 case studies. Three focus groups were held: two with researchers (n = 4 and n = 6) and one with PPI contributors (n = 5). Findings detail to what extent projects made sense of PPI, bought in to PPI, operationalised PPI and appraised it, thus identifying barriers and enablers to fully embedded PPI.
Combining NPT with AR allows us to assess the embeddedness of PPI within projects and programme, to inform specific local action and report broader conceptual lessons for PPI knowledge and practice informing the development of an action framework for embedding PPI in research programmes. To embed PPI within similar programmes teams, professionals, disciplines and institutions should be recognised as variably networked into existing PPI support. Further focus and research is needed on sharing PPI learning and supporting innovation in PPI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215953</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31086394</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Biology and Life Sciences ; Business metrics ; Case studies ; Consultation ; Data processing ; Embedding ; Finance ; Handbooks ; Health ; Health sciences ; Health services ; Health Services Research ; Humans ; Knowledge ; Medical research ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Methods ; Patient Participation - statistics & numerical data ; Patient safety ; People and places ; Public involvement ; Public participation ; Qualitative analysis ; Qualitative research ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Research design ; Research funding ; Research methodology ; Research projects ; Researchers ; Sailing ; Science Policy ; Ships ; Sleep ; Social Sciences ; Stakeholder Participation ; Triangulation</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2019-05, Vol.14 (5), p.e0215953-e0215953</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2019 Keenan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2019 Keenan et al 2019 Keenan et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-7555b10f740f227d81cfd38afc9b54b4c37fe48368df6518dc34c0dc8da242913</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-7555b10f740f227d81cfd38afc9b54b4c37fe48368df6518dc34c0dc8da242913</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8676-7349 ; 0000-0003-2904-304X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6516650/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6516650/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793,79600,79601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31086394$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Solari, Alessandra</contributor><creatorcontrib>Keenan, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Poland, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boote, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Howe, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wythe, Helena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varley, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vicary, Penny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Irvine, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wellings, Amander</creatorcontrib><title>'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a requirement for UK health and social care research funding. Evidence for how best to implement PPI in research programmes, such as National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), remains limited. This paper reports findings from an action research (AR) project called IMPRESS, which aims to strengthen PPI within CLAHRC East of England (EoE). IMPRESS combines AR with Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore PPI within diverse case study projects, identifying actions to implement, test and refine to further embed PPI.
We purposively selected CLAHRC EoE case study projects for in-depth analysis of PPI using NPT. Data were generated from project PPI documentation, semi-structured qualitative interviews with researchers and PPI contributors and focus groups. Transcripts and documents were subjected to abductive thematic analysis and triangulation within case. Systematic across case comparison of themes was undertaken with findings and implications refined through stakeholder consultation.
We interviewed 24 researchers and 13 PPI contributors and analysed 28 documents from 10 case studies. Three focus groups were held: two with researchers (n = 4 and n = 6) and one with PPI contributors (n = 5). Findings detail to what extent projects made sense of PPI, bought in to PPI, operationalised PPI and appraised it, thus identifying barriers and enablers to fully embedded PPI.
Combining NPT with AR allows us to assess the embeddedness of PPI within projects and programme, to inform specific local action and report broader conceptual lessons for PPI knowledge and practice informing the development of an action framework for embedding PPI in research programmes. To embed PPI within similar programmes teams, professionals, disciplines and institutions should be recognised as variably networked into existing PPI support. Further focus and research is needed on sharing PPI learning and supporting innovation in PPI.</description><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Business metrics</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Consultation</subject><subject>Data processing</subject><subject>Embedding</subject><subject>Finance</subject><subject>Handbooks</subject><subject>Health</subject><subject>Health sciences</subject><subject>Health services</subject><subject>Health Services Research</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Patient Participation - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>People and places</subject><subject>Public involvement</subject><subject>Public participation</subject><subject>Qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Research design</subject><subject>Research funding</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Research projects</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Sailing</subject><subject>Science Policy</subject><subject>Ships</subject><subject>Sleep</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Stakeholder Participation</subject><subject>Triangulation</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk21r1TAUx4soTqffQDQgOAXvtUmaPuyFMMbUwXCiU1-GND1tc0mbmrR37hv7MTzd7sau7IUUmuTkd_4n5yQnip7ReEl5Rt-t3OR7ZZeD62EZMyoKwe9Fj2jB2SJlMb9_a74TPQ5hFceC52n6MNrhNM5TXiSPoj97P2HPAxlUCNA34AMJyljTN8T0ZGwBlx3-WjO8JeU0knMgrVoDwejEnfekBD-2gYyOBAswoNfePjlaKzupcVYZcIB-JKqvyDCV1mhE1s6uoZvN52ZsMZAiHhrjMB-cBFBet2TwrvGq62CfHCChR9zf2l2BHlGsdr6DipQX5DPOlDVBXaJfvNMQAjlrwfmLJ9GDWtkATzfjbvT9w9HZ4afFyenH48ODk4VOCzYuMiFESeM6S-KasazKqa4rnqtaF6VIykTzrIYk52le1amgeaV5ouNK55ViCSso341eXOkO1gW5uaQgGWOCsixlBRLHV0Tl1EoO3nTKX0injLw0ON9I5UejLUgNmSgg5rxis3peJgJUqlWZVQWrUoVa7zfRphKLoLGkXtkt0e2d3rSycWuJZ09TEaPA642Ad78mCKPsTNBgrerBTfO5OYspE4Ih-vIf9O7sNlSjMIH5djCunkXlgchFQvOEz2GXd1D4VdAZjS-6Nmjfcniz5YDMCL_HRk0hyONvX_-fPf2xzb66xbagLL5mZ6f5BYVtMLkCtXcheKhvikxjOTfkdTXk3JBy05Do9vz2Bd04XXcg_wv3UjUj</recordid><startdate>20190514</startdate><enddate>20190514</enddate><creator>Keenan, Julia</creator><creator>Poland, Fiona</creator><creator>Boote, Jonathan</creator><creator>Howe, Amanda</creator><creator>Wythe, Helena</creator><creator>Varley, Anna</creator><creator>Vicary, Penny</creator><creator>Irvine, Lisa</creator><creator>Wellings, Amander</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8676-7349</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2904-304X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190514</creationdate><title>'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory</title><author>Keenan, Julia ; Poland, Fiona ; Boote, Jonathan ; Howe, Amanda ; Wythe, Helena ; Varley, Anna ; Vicary, Penny ; Irvine, Lisa ; Wellings, Amander</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c692t-7555b10f740f227d81cfd38afc9b54b4c37fe48368df6518dc34c0dc8da242913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Business metrics</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Consultation</topic><topic>Data processing</topic><topic>Embedding</topic><topic>Finance</topic><topic>Handbooks</topic><topic>Health</topic><topic>Health sciences</topic><topic>Health services</topic><topic>Health Services Research</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Patient Participation - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>People and places</topic><topic>Public involvement</topic><topic>Public participation</topic><topic>Qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Research design</topic><topic>Research funding</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Research projects</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Sailing</topic><topic>Science Policy</topic><topic>Ships</topic><topic>Sleep</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Stakeholder Participation</topic><topic>Triangulation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Keenan, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Poland, Fiona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boote, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Howe, Amanda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wythe, Helena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Varley, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vicary, Penny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Irvine, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wellings, Amander</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Keenan, Julia</au><au>Poland, Fiona</au><au>Boote, Jonathan</au><au>Howe, Amanda</au><au>Wythe, Helena</au><au>Varley, Anna</au><au>Vicary, Penny</au><au>Irvine, Lisa</au><au>Wellings, Amander</au><au>Solari, Alessandra</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2019-05-14</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>e0215953</spage><epage>e0215953</epage><pages>e0215953-e0215953</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a requirement for UK health and social care research funding. Evidence for how best to implement PPI in research programmes, such as National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaborations for Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs), remains limited. This paper reports findings from an action research (AR) project called IMPRESS, which aims to strengthen PPI within CLAHRC East of England (EoE). IMPRESS combines AR with Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to explore PPI within diverse case study projects, identifying actions to implement, test and refine to further embed PPI.
We purposively selected CLAHRC EoE case study projects for in-depth analysis of PPI using NPT. Data were generated from project PPI documentation, semi-structured qualitative interviews with researchers and PPI contributors and focus groups. Transcripts and documents were subjected to abductive thematic analysis and triangulation within case. Systematic across case comparison of themes was undertaken with findings and implications refined through stakeholder consultation.
We interviewed 24 researchers and 13 PPI contributors and analysed 28 documents from 10 case studies. Three focus groups were held: two with researchers (n = 4 and n = 6) and one with PPI contributors (n = 5). Findings detail to what extent projects made sense of PPI, bought in to PPI, operationalised PPI and appraised it, thus identifying barriers and enablers to fully embedded PPI.
Combining NPT with AR allows us to assess the embeddedness of PPI within projects and programme, to inform specific local action and report broader conceptual lessons for PPI knowledge and practice informing the development of an action framework for embedding PPI in research programmes. To embed PPI within similar programmes teams, professionals, disciplines and institutions should be recognised as variably networked into existing PPI support. Further focus and research is needed on sharing PPI learning and supporting innovation in PPI.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>31086394</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0215953</doi><tpages>e0215953</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8676-7349</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2904-304X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2019-05, Vol.14 (5), p.e0215953-e0215953 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_2225127629 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Biology and Life Sciences Business metrics Case studies Consultation Data processing Embedding Finance Handbooks Health Health sciences Health services Health Services Research Humans Knowledge Medical research Medicine and Health Sciences Methods Patient Participation - statistics & numerical data Patient safety People and places Public involvement Public participation Qualitative analysis Qualitative research Research and Analysis Methods Research design Research funding Research methodology Research projects Researchers Sailing Science Policy Ships Sleep Social Sciences Stakeholder Participation Triangulation |
| title | 'We're passengers sailing in the same ship, but we have our own berths to sleep in': Evaluating patient and public involvement within a regional research programme: An action research project informed by Normalisation Process Theory |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T12%3A59%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle='We're%20passengers%20sailing%20in%20the%20same%20ship,%20but%20we%20have%20our%20own%20berths%20to%20sleep%20in':%20Evaluating%20patient%20and%20public%20involvement%20within%20a%20regional%20research%20programme:%20An%20action%20research%20project%20informed%20by%20Normalisation%20Process%20Theory&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Keenan,%20Julia&rft.date=2019-05-14&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=e0215953&rft.epage=e0215953&rft.pages=e0215953-e0215953&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0215953&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA585418430%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2225127629&rft_id=info:pmid/31086394&rft_galeid=A585418430&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_ce759e033d224298b45ea6cab7d92d6a&rfr_iscdi=true |