Exploring perceived barriers, drivers, impacts and the need for evaluation of public involvement in health and social care research: A modified Delphi study

BMJ Open

Volumn 4, Issue 6, 2014, Pages

  Snape, D ^a   Kirkham, J ^a   Britten, N ^b   Froggatt, K ^c   Gradinger, F ^b   Lobban, F ^c   Popay, Jennie ^c   Wyatt, K ^b   Jacoby, Ann ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFLICT; CONSENSUS; DELPHI STUDY; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; NORMAL HUMAN; PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT; SCIENTIST; SOCIAL CARE; SOCIETY; UNITED KINGDOM; ATTITUDE; COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; RESEARCH; SOCIAL ASPECTS AND RELATED PHENOMENA;

ATTITUDE; COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; CONSENSUS; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; HUMANS; RESEARCH; SOCIOLOGICAL FACTORS;

EID: 84903179385     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-004943     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Caron-Flinterman JF, Broerse JEW, Bunders JFG. The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research? Soc Sci Med 2005;11:2575-84. (Pubitemid 40462381)
2. Department of Health. Research governance framework for health and social care. 2nd edn. London: Department of Health, 2005.
3. Nilsen ES, Myrhaug HT, Johansen M, et al. Methods of consumer involvement in developing healthcare policy and research, clinical practice guidelines and patient information material. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;3:CD004563.
4. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). Patients and public. http://www.crncc.nihr.ac.uk/PI (accessed 18 Jun 2012).
5. Beresford P. User involvement in research and evaluation: liberation or regulation? Soc Policy Soc 2002;1:95-105.
6. Beresford P. User involvement in research. Nurs Times Res 2003;8:36-46.
7. Popay J, Attree P, Hornby D, et al. Community engagement to address the wider social determinants of health: a review of evidence on impact, experience and process. London: NICE, 2007. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp? action=folder&o=34709 (accessed 18 Jun 2012).
8. Wyatt K, Carter M, Mahtani V, et al. The impact of consumer involvement in research: an evaluation of consumer involvement in the London Primary Care Studies Programme. Fam Pract 2008;25:154-61. (Pubitemid 351965933)
9. Staley K. Exploring impact: public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE, 2009.
10. Boote J, Telford R, Cooper C. Consumer involvement in health research: a review and research agenda. Health Policy 2002;61:213-36. (Pubitemid 34669916)
11. Minogue V, Boness J, Brown A, et al. The impact of service user involvement in research. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 2005;18:103-12. (Pubitemid 40754967)
12. Barber R, Boote JD, Parry GD, et al. Can the impact of PI on research be evaluated? A mixed methods study. Health Expect 2011;15:229-41.
13. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Mockford C, et al. The GRIPP checklist: strengthening the quality of patient and PI reporting in research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2011;27:391-9.
14. Staniszewska S, Adebajo A, Barber R, et al. Developing the evidence base of patient and public involvement in health and social care research: the case for measuring impact. Int J Consum Stud 2011;35:628-32.
15. Entwistle VA, Renfrew MJ, Yearley S, et al. Lay perspectives: advantages for health researchers. BMJ 1998;316:463-6. (Pubitemid 28121309)
16. Oliver S, Milne R, Bradburn J, et al. Investigating consumer perspectives on evaluating health technologies. Evaluation 2001;7:468.
17. Oliver SR, Rees RW, Clarke-Jones L, et al. A multidimensional conceptual framework for analysing public involvement in health services research. Health Expect 2008;11:72-84. (Pubitemid 351239422)
18. Staniszewska S, Herron-Marx S, Mockford C. Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement: the need for an evidence base. Int J Qual Health Care 2008;20:373-4.
19. Boote J. Towards a new research agenda for PPI: an overview of the journey travelled, and consideration of where we may want to go next. Patient, Carer and Public Involvement Seminar 'Moving from project-led PPI to research-led PPI. University of Leeds, 14 May 2013. http://www. healthcareconferences.leeds.ac.uk/downloads/JonathanB-Leeds-PPI-talk-REVISED- 7th-May-2013.pdf (accessed 11 Jul 2013).
20. Krieger J, Takaro T, Allen C, et al. The Seattle-King County healthy homes project: implementation of a comprehensive approach to improving indoor environmental quality for low-income children with asthma. Environ Health Perspect 2002;110(Suppl 2):311-22. (Pubitemid 34436396)
21. Dona G. Children as research advisers: contributions to a 'methodology of participation' in researching children in difficult circumstances. Int J Migration Health Soc Care 2006;2:22-34.
22. Elliott E, Watson A, Harries U. Harnessing expertise: involving peer interviewers in qualitative research with hard-to-reach populations. Health Expect 2002;5:172-8. (Pubitemid 34591877)
23. Bryant L, Beckett J. The practicality and acceptability of an advocacy service in the emergency department for people attending following self-harm. Leeds: University of Leeds, 2006.
24. Cited in: Staley K. Exploring impact: public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE, 2009.
25. Faulkner A. Beyond our expectations: a report of the experiences of involving service users in forensic mental health research. National Programme on Forensic Mental Health R&D. London: Department of Health, 2006.
26. Snape D, Kirkham J, Preston J, et al . Exploring areas of consensus and conflict around values underpinning public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi study. BMJ Open 2014;4:e004217.
27. Jones J, Hunter D. Consensus methods for medical and health services research. BMJ 1995;311:276-380.
28. Walker A, Selfe J. The Delphi method: a useful tool for the allied health researcher. Br J Ther Rehabil 1996;3:677-81.
29. Keeney S, Hassona F, McKennab HP. A critical review of the Delphi technique as a research methodology for nursing. Int J Nurs Stud 2001;38:195-200. (Pubitemid 33660489)
30. Daykin N, Sanidas M, Barley V, et al. Developing consensus and interprofessional working in cancer services: the case of user involvement. J Interprof Care 2002;16:405-6. (Pubitemid 35402141)
31. Boote J, Barber R, Cooper C. Principles and indicators of successful consumer involvement in NHS research: results of a Delphi study and subgroup analysis. Health Policy 2006;75:280-97. (Pubitemid 43042362)
32. Efstathiou N, Ameen J, Coll AM. A Delphi study to identify healthcare users' priorities for cancer care in Greece. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2008;12:262-371.
33. Dalkey N, Helmer O. Delphi technique: characteristics and sequence model to the use of experts. Manage Sci 1963;9:458-67.
34. McKenna HP. The Delphi technique: a worthwhile approach for nursing? J Adv Nurs 1994;19:1221-5.
35. Crisp J, Pelletier D, Duffield C, et al. The Delphi method? Nurs Res 1997;46:116-18.
36. Hassen F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 2000;32:1008-15.
37. Beretta R. A critical review of the Delphi technique. Nur Res 1996;3:79-89. (Pubitemid 126084862)
38. Campbell SM, Braspenning J, Hutchinson A, et al. Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. Qual Saf Health Care 2002;11:358-64. (Pubitemid 35463394)
39. Williams C, Webb P. The Delphi technique: a methodological discussion. J Adv Nurs 1994;19:180-6.
40. Telford R, Boote JD, Cooper CL. What does it mean to involve consumers successfully in NHS research? A consensus study. Health Expect 2004;7:209-20. (Pubitemid 39166370)
41. Lynn MR, Layman EL, Englebardt SP. Nursing administration research priorities: a National Delphi Study. J Nurs Adm 1998;28:7-11. (Pubitemid 28225944)
42. McDonnell J, Meijler A, Kahan JP, et al. Panellist consistency in the assessment of medical appropriateness. Health Policy 1996;37:139-52. (Pubitemid 26255176)
43. Hardy DJ, O'Brien AP, Gaskin CJ, et al. J Adv Nurs 2004;46:95-109.
44. INVOLVE. INVOLVE strategy 2012-2015. Putting people first in research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE, 2012. http://www.invo.org.uk (accessed 18 Jun 2012)
45. Duffield C. The Delphi technique: a comparison of results obtained using two expert panels. Int J Nurs Stud 1993;30:227-37.
46. Lemmer B. Successive surveys of an expert panel: research in decision making with health visitors. J Adv Nurs 1998;27:538-45. (Pubitemid 128451645)
47. Green B, Jones M, Hughes D, et al. Applying the Delphi technique in a study of GP 's information requirement. Health Soc Care Commun 1999;7:198-205.
48. Loughlin KG, Moore LF. Using Delphi to achieve congruent objectives and activities in a paediatrics department. J Med Educ 1979;54:101-6. (Pubitemid 10053478)
49. Richie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In: Bryman A, Burgess RG, eds. Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge, 1994:173-94.
50. Sitzia J, Wood N. Response rate in patient satisfaction research: an analysis of 210 published studies. Int J Qual Health Care 1998;10:311-17. (Pubitemid 28385074)
51. Arber S. Designing samples. In: Gilbert N, ed. Researching social life. London: SAGE Publications, 2001:68-92.
52. Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, et al. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: systematic review. BMJ 2002;324:1168-9.
53. INVOLVE. Payment for involvement: a guide for making payments to members of the public actively involved in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE, 2012. http://www.invo.org.uk (accessed 18 Apr 2013)
54. Boote J, Twiddy M, Baird W, et al. 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. Early View (online version). doi: 10.1111/hex.12130
55. Walker D-M, 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. Early View (online version). doi: 10.1111/hex.12127.
56. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). NIHR research design service: research by design. http://www.nihr.ac.uk/files/Publications/ RDSNationalLeafletFINAL (accessed 18 Jul 2013)
57. McColl E, Jacoby A, Thomas L, et al. Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. HTA 2001;5:101-32.
58. Palm M. Values, principles and standards for public involvement in research. INVOLVE Coordinating Centre, October 2013, p.10.