2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The impact of patient and public involvement on COVID-19 immunology research: experiences from the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in clinical trial research is recognised as relevant but the active involvement of patients and the public in basic science or laboratory-based research is seen as more challenging and not often reported. PPI within the UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC), a translational research project aimed at tackling some of the key questions about the immune system’s response to SARS-CoV-2, is an example of overcoming negative perceptions and obstacles. Given the widespread impact of COVID-19, it was important to consider the impact of UK-CIC research on patients and the public throughout, and the PPI panel were an integral part of the consortium.

          Findings

          Building in funding for a PPI panel to value involvement and ensuring effective expert administrative support and management of PPI were crucial to success. Facilitating relationships and quality interactions between public contributors and researchers required time and commitment to the project from all parties. Through creating a platform and open space to explore diverse views and a wide range of perspectives, PPI was able to influence researchers’ ways of thinking about their research and impact future research questions about COVID-19 immunology. Moreover, there was long-term impact from the involvement of the PPI panel in COVID-19 research and their value was reflected in invitations to contribute to additional immunology projects.

          Conclusion

          The ability to conduct meaningful PPI with basic immunology research has been shown possible through the UK-CIC in the context of the fast-moving COVID-19 pandemic. The UK-CIC project has laid the foundations for PPI in immunology and this should now be built upon for the advantage of future basic scientific research; PPI can impact greatly on laboratory-based research when given the opportunity to do so.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40900-023-00446-1.

          Abstract

          The UK Coronavirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC) was established to address key questions about the immune system’s response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus which caused the COVID-19 pandemic, to benefit patient and public health at pace. The project brought together immunology laboratory-based research with the lived experience of patient and public contributors to ensure that the priorities for these groups and impacts of the research on the wider public were considered throughout. A Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) panel was set up to meet regularly with the scientists to provide a unique perspective, ask pertinent questions about the implications of the research, and discuss what was important to the public and patient groups. This paper examines the practical resources, support, and relationship building necessary to embed PPI in basic scientific research as well as how this can be achieved within urgent, critical research conducted during a pandemic situation. It explores the successes, impacts and legacy of involvement for researchers, the research, and importantly, the patient and public contributors. By sharing experiences from UK-CIC to help dispel any existing misconceptions that PPI can act as a hindrance, this paper proposes greater encouragement of PPI in all basic science research.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40900-023-00446-1.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Evaluating patient and public involvement in research

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Is it worth it? Patient and public views on the impact of their involvement in health research and its assessment: a UK‐based qualitative interview study

            Abstract Background There are mounting calls for robust, critical evaluation of the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research. However, questions remain about how to assess its impact, and whether it should be assessed at all. The debate has thus far been dominated by professionals. Objective To explore the views of PPI contributors involved in health research regarding the impact of PPI on research, whether and how it should be assessed. Design Qualitative interview study. Setting and participants Thirty‐eight PPI contributors involved in health research across the UK. Results Participants felt that PPI has a beneficial impact on health research. They described various impactful roles, which we conceptualize as the ‘expert in lived experience’, the ‘creative outsider’, the ‘free challenger’, the ‘bridger’, the ‘motivator’ and the ‘passive presence’. Participants generally supported assessing the impact of PPI, while acknowledging the challenges and concerns about the appropriateness and feasibility of measurement. They expressed a range of views about what impacts should be assessed, by whom and how. Individual feedback on impact was seen as an important driver of improved impact and motivation to stay involved. Conclusions While there appears to be widespread support for PPI impact assessment among PPI contributors, their views on what to assess and how are diverse. PPI contributors should be involved as equal partners in debates and decisions about these issues. Individual feedback on impact may increase PPI contributors’ potential impact and their motivation to stay involved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              “About sixty per cent I want to do it”: Health researchers’ attitudes to, and experiences of, patient and public involvement (PPI)—A qualitative interview study

              Abstract Background Funders, policy‐makers and research organizations increasingly expect health researchers in the UK to involve patients and members of the public in research. It has been stated that it makes research “more effective, more credible and often more cost efficient.” However, the evidence base for this assertion is evolving and can be limited. There has been little research into how health researchers feel about involving people, how they go about it, how they manage formal policy rhetoric, and what happens in practice. Objective To explore researchers’ experiences and perceptions of patient and public involvement (PPI). Methods Semi‐structured interview study of 36 health researchers (both clinical and non‐clinical), with data collection and thematic analysis informed by the theoretical domains framework. Results In the course of our analysis, we developed four themes that encapsulate the participants’ experiences and perceptions of PPI. Participants expressed ambivalence, cynicism and enthusiasm about PPI, an activity that creates emotional labour, which is both rewarding and burdensome and requires practical and social support. It is operationalized in an academic context influenced by power and incentives. Discussion and conclusions Researchers’ experiences and attitudes towards patient and public involvement are a key factor in the successful embedding of involvement within the wider research culture. We call for a culture change that supports the development of effective organizational approach to support involvement.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                e.aquino@immunology.org
                Journal
                Res Involv Engagem
                Res Involv Engagem
                Research Involvement and Engagement
                BioMed Central (London )
                2056-7529
                22 May 2023
                22 May 2023
                2023
                : 9
                : 34
                Affiliations
                [1 ]British Society for Immunology, 9 Appold Street, London, EC2A 2AP UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.6572.6, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7486, Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, , University of Birmingham, ; Birmingham, B15 2TT UK
                [3 ]Greater Manchester, UK
                [4 ]West Midlands, UK
                [5 ]Birmingham, UK
                [6 ]Clackmannanshire, UK
                [7 ]East Yorkshire, UK
                Article
                446
                10.1186/s40900-023-00446-1
                10201499
                37217938
                911b8874-27c1-4a44-af29-ce57f43a7735
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 9 September 2022
                : 9 May 2023
                Categories
                Comment
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                immunology,covid-19,ppi,patient and public involvement,public contributors,basic science,laboratory-based science,measuring impact,impact

                Comments

                Comment on this article