Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2026
A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Patient- and Public-Led Research - How Is It Defined and Practiced: A Scoping Review
Ellen Wang1,2, Linda Truong1,3, Nejat Hassan1,2
1Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Background:
Patient- and public-led research signals more than a redistribution of decision-making authority, positioning patients and public as key contributors of scholarly inquiry throughout the research process. Despite the growing awareness of patient- and public-led research endeavors, it is unclear how they are conducted. This scoping review aimed to synthesize how patient- and public-led research is defined and practiced in health research.
Methods:
Our scoping review was guided by the Arksey and O'Malley's framework (2005) and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search of health research databases and grey literature sources was conducted. Included studies were published in English and described how patients and public held final decision-making authority (Empower on the International Association for Public Participation, IAP2 continuum) across various research roles and tasks. These standardized roles and tasks were described using the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT). Through iterative discussions and abductive analyses, groupings of studies that shared similar contexts and extended beyond standardized roles and tasks were identified.
Results:
Our search identified 4,723 records, of which 68 articles describing 62 studies met the inclusion criteria. Patient- and public-led research was described using terms including consumer-led, user-led, Indigenous-led; with only 14 (23%) studies offering an explicit definition. Our review identified three contexts in which patient- and public-led research occurred including: how research was carried out (operations), how decisions were made (governance), and how intellectual/experiential contributions from patients and public shaped research trajectories (accountability).
Conclusion:
By shifting the focus from involvement to leadership, our findings provide a foundation for more intentional design, meaningful support, and robust evaluation of patient- and public-led health research.
Related Concept Videos
01:13Patient-centered Care
01:18The Scientific Method in Nursing Process
When using research findings to change practice, one must understand the process used to guide a study. The scientific method is a systematic, step-by-step process that supports the data's validity, reliability, and generalizability. As a result, findings can be safely...
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, controlled...
01:56Ethics in Research
01:30Psychosurgery
Historical Development of Psychosurgery
In the 1930s, Portuguese neurologist Antonio Egas Moniz introduced a surgical procedure designed...
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 evaluation by...