Assessing the impact, uptake and use of reporting guidelines for patient and public involvement in research: GRIPP2 -...

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research is increasingly recognised for its potential to enhance feasibility, improve relevance and foster collaboration at different stages of a study. Reporting guidelines such as GRIPP2 (Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public) have been developed to help improve completeness and transparency in PPI reporting. This meta-research project aims to assess the impact of the GRIPP2 reporting guidelines through citation and alternative metrics, analysing its uptake or adoption across authors, institutions, journals and countries, as well as its practical application in reporting PPI within diverse research designs.

This protocol for a meta-research project consists of two studies. In Study 1, we will conduct a search across Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar to identify all publications citing the GRIPP2 guidelines (planned for July 2026 using forward citation analysis). Retrieved records will undergo standardised processing and structured de-duplication to ensure each citing article is represented once. Following de-duplication, data from unique citations-including title, publication year, journal, subject category, keywords, document type, citations, authors' names, institutional affiliations, country and funding sources-will be collected. Citation counts, alternative metrics (eg, mentions in policy documents, news media) and knowledge production patterns across authors, institutions, journals and countries will be analysed to assess GRIPP2's impact and uptake of the guidelines. Descriptive analyses will be conducted (including the number of papers, citations, authors, countries, journals, keywords, funding, field distribution and main collaboration metrics). Network analyses will be carried out to study the structure of collaborations. In Study 2, we will evaluate a random sample of 300 research articles citing GRIPP2, including randomised trials (n=100), systematic reviews with meta-analyses (n=100) and health economic evaluations (n=100). If an insufficient number of citing studies are available within these categories, we will include additional study types identified in Study 1 (eg, study protocols, observational studies, mixed-methods or qualitative research studies and other types of reviews). Reporting and PPI practices in each article will be extracted by at least two researchers using a standardised data extraction form. Information on general, methodological and PPI items will be analysed and reported, stratified by study design (eg, randomised trials vs systematic reviews vs health economic evaluations).

Due to the nature of the proposed study, no ethical approval will be required. All data will be deposited in a cross-disciplinary public repository. It is anticipated the study findings could be relevant to a variety of audiences. Study findings will be disseminated at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/et85d.