journal article Open Access Apr 22, 2019

Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: Systematic review and co‐design pilot

Health Expectations Vol. 22 No. 4 pp. 785-801 · Wiley
View at Publisher Save 10.1111/hex.12888
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundNumerous frameworks for supporting, evaluating and reporting patient and public involvement in research exist. The literature is diverse and theoretically heterogeneous.ObjectivesTo identify and synthesize published frameworks, consider whether and how these have been used, and apply design principles to improve usability.Search strategyKeyword search of six databases; hand search of eight journals; ancestry and snowball search; requests to experts.Inclusion criteriaPublished, systematic approaches (frameworks) designed to support, evaluate or report on patient or public involvement in health‐related research.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted on provenance; collaborators and sponsors; theoretical basis; lay input; intended user(s) and use(s); topics covered; examples of use; critiques; and updates. We used the Canadian Centre for Excellence on Partnerships with Patients and Public (CEPPP) evaluation tool and hermeneutic methodology to grade and synthesize the frameworks. In five co‐design workshops, we tested evidence‐based resources based on the review findings.ResultsOur final data set consisted of 65 frameworks, most of which scored highly on the CEPPP tool. They had different provenances, intended purposes, strengths and limitations. We grouped them into five categories: power‐focused; priority‐setting; study‐focused; report‐focused; and partnership‐focused. Frameworks were used mainly by the groups who developed them. The empirical component of our study generated a structured format and evidence‐based facilitator notes for a “build your own framework” co‐design workshop.ConclusionThe plethora of frameworks combined with evidence of limited transferability suggests that a single, off‐the‐shelf framework may be less useful than a menu of evidence‐based resources which stakeholders can use to co‐design their own frameworks.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
105
[7]
Brett J (2010)
[13]
Gibbons M (1994)
[17]
Denegri S (2015)
[18]
National Institute for Health Research (2016)
[19]
Walshe K "Reshaping the agenda of the European Commission for the health systems and policy research in Europe within Horizon 2020" Epidemiol Biostat Public Health (2013)
[20]
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (2017)
[23]
Centre of Excellence on Partnership with Patients and the Public (2017)
[24]
Steuli J (2016)
[25]
Faulkner A (2016)
[26]
Staley K (2009)
[27]
National Institute for Health Research (2017)
[28]
Boell SK "A hermeneutic approach for conducting literature reviews and literature searches" Commun Assoc Inf Syst (2014)
[29]
‘Collective making’ as knowledge mobilisation: the contribution of participatory design in the co-creation of knowledge in healthcare

Joe Langley, Daniel Wolstenholme, Jo Cooke

BMC Health Services Research 10.1186/s12913-018-3397-y
[30]
Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews?

TRISHA GREENHALGH, Sally Thorne, Kirsti Malterud

European Journal of Clinical Investigation 10.1111/eci.12931
[34]
GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research

S. Staniszewska, J. Brett, I. Simera et al.

Research Involvement and Engagement 10.1186/s40900-017-0062-2
[46]
Cowan K (2013)

Showing 50 of 105 references

Metrics
733
Citations
105
References
Details
Published
Apr 22, 2019
Vol/Issue
22(4)
Pages
785-801
License
View
Funding
National Institute for Health Research Award: BRC-1215-20008
Cite This Article
TRISHA GREENHALGH, Lisa Hinton, Teresa Finlay, et al. (2019). Frameworks for supporting patient and public involvement in research: Systematic review and co‐design pilot. Health Expectations, 22(4), 785-801. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12888