Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 14, 2026
Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement in Clinical Trials: A Multi-Perspective Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the
Blerina Kellezi1,2, Heather Peacock2, Trevor Jones2
1Department of Psychology, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK.
Background:
Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) has many benefits for the design, delivery and dissemination of health research, but this can be difficult to achieve. Systematic reporting and evaluation of PPIE in multi-year, multisite and complex clinical trials is very limited.
Methodology:
This evaluation presents a multi-perspective description and evaluation of patient and public involvement within a large-scale, multisite, longitudinal research programme focused on developing and evaluating a vocational rehabilitation and clinical psychology intervention for individuals recovering from traumatic injury. Conducted as part of the NIHR-funded ROWTATE research programme (2019-2026), the evaluation explores the scope, impact, and lived experiences of PPIE group members across all phases of the study, from development of the intervention, feasibility study and trial design to intervention delivery, data collection, analysis and dissemination. Employing multiple methods, including open-ended surveys with PPIE group members and researchers, a 'You Said, We Did' activity log, and minute taking, the study identifies key patterns related to PPIE group members' motivations, contributions, personal impact and barriers and facilitators to engagement.
Results:
Findings highlight the significant value of PPIE in enhancing study relevance, improving data collection and communication strategies, informing rehabilitation, clinical psychology and health economics components, and shaping intervention delivery. PPIE group members reported a strong sense of purpose and intellectual engagement, despite challenges including communication gaps and role clarity. Researchers valued PPIE contribution to the research, and the positive and enriching experience of working with PPIE group members. Both groups reflected on the barriers and facilitators to PPIE.
Conclusion:
The evaluation highlights the importance of inclusive, well-supported, and transparent PPIE practices and contributes novel insights into the PPIE role in under-researched domains such as clinical psychology and health economics.
Patient Or Public Contribution:
Traumatic injury survivors were involved in all processes of this evaluation. This includes research design, funding acquisition, data collection, data analysis and interpretation and the write-up of this manuscript. Five traumatic injury survivors are co-authors of this manuscript.
More Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:16Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
01:11Clinical Trials: Overview
01:15Nursing Evaluation
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:11Blinding