Patient and public involvement in the early stages of clinical trial development: A systematic cohort investigation

BMJ Open

Volumn 4, Issue 7, 2014, Pages

  Gamble, Carrol ^a   Dudley, Louise ^a   Allam, Alison ^b   Bell, Philip ^c   Goodare, Heather ^d   Hanley, Bec ^b   Preston, Jennifer ^a   Walker, Alison ^d   Williamson, Paula ^a   Young, Bridget ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b Patient and Public Advisory Group   (United Kingdom)

^c Patient and Public Advisory Group   (United Kingdom)

^d Patient and Public Advisory Group   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PLACEBO;

AGED; ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CHILD; CHILDBIRTH; CLINICAL RESEARCH; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMMUNITY CARE; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMYELINATING DISEASE; EMERGENCY CARE; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; FUNDING; GROUPS BY AGE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; MENTAL HEALTH; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT REFERRAL; PEDIATRICS; PREGNANCY; PREVENTION STUDY; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SECONDARY HEALTH CARE; SOCIAL CARE; SOCIAL INTERACTION; STUDY DESIGN; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TERTIARY HEALTH CARE; ADULT; COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; PROCEDURES; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

ADULT; CHILD; COHORT STUDIES; COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84904635885     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005234     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Staley K. Exploring impact: public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. Eastleigh: INVOLVE, 2009.
2. Boote J, Baird W, Sutton A. Public involvement in the design and conduct of clinical trials: a review. Int J Interdiscip Soc Sci 2011;5:91-111.
3. Department of Health. Best research for best health: a new national health research strategy. London: Department of Health, 2006.
4. Robinson L, Newton J, Dawson P. Professionals and the public: power or partnership in health research? J Eval Clin Pract 2010;18:276-82.
5. Staniszewska S, Jones N, Newburn M, et al . User involvement in the development of a research bid: barriers, enablers and impacts. Heal Expect 2007;10:173-83. (Pubitemid 46808893)
6. Fudge N, Wolfe R, McKevitt R. Involving older people in health research. Age Ageing 2007;36:492-500. (Pubitemid 47558836)
7. Bastian H. Consumer and researcher collaboration in trials: filling the gaps. Clin Trials 2005;2:3-4. (Pubitemid 40340148)
8. Kaur G, Smyth R, Williamson P. Developing a survey of barriers and facilitators to recruitment in randomized controlled trials. Trials 2012;13:218.
9. Marshman Z, Innes N, Deery R, et al. The management of dental caries in primary teeth-involving service providers and users in the design of a trial. Trials 2012;13:143.
10. Boote J, Baird W, Beecroft R. Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: a narrative review of case examples. Health Policy 2010;95:10-23.
11. Forbes LJL, Nicholls CM, Linsell L, et al. Involving users in the design of a randomised controlled trial of an intervention to promote early presentation in breast cancer: qualitative study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010;10:110.
12. Smith E, Ross F, Donovan S, et al. Service user involvement in nursing, midwifery and health visiting research: a review of evidence and practice. Int J Nurs Stud 2008;45:298-315.
13. Hanley B, Truesdale A, King A, et al. Involving consumers in designing, conducting, and interpreting randomised controlled trials: questionnaire survey. BMJ 2001;322:519-23. (Pubitemid 32230914)
14. Evans B, Bedson E, Bell P, et al. Involving service users in trials: developing a standard operating procedure. Trials 2013;14:219.
15. Mental Health Research Network and INVOLVE. Budgeting for involvement: Practical advice on budgeting for actively involving the public in research studies . London: Mental Health Research Network, INVOLVE: Eastleigh, 2013.
16. 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
17. 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
18. Wright D, Foster R, Amir Z, et al. Critical appraisal guidelines for assessing the quality and impact of user involvement in research. Health Expect 2010;13:359-68.
19. Ives J, Damery S, Redwod S. PPI, paradoxes and Plato: who's sailing the ship? J Med Ethics 2013;39:181-5.
20. Staley K. There is no paradox with PPI in research. J Med Ethics 2013;39:186-7.