Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 2, 2026

Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Evaluating the Process and Outcome of a Primary Care Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Programme: A Pilot Study
Prawira Oka1,2, Chirk Jenn Ng1,3, Hani Salim4
1SingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Introduction:
Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research maximises its relevance, quality, and impact by partnering with the public throughout the research journey. In Singapore, a PPI group named Patient Research Advocate and Guidance to Maximise Safety in Trials and Innovation Committee (PRAGMATIC) was established in 2020 by a public primary care institution to create a conducive platform for the public to provide feedback to primary care researchers on their research proposals. This pilot study aimed to evaluate the impact of the committee's feedback on the research process.
Methods:
From 2023 to 2024, researchers were invited to present their patient-fronting research proposals to PRAGMATIC. Before the presentation, researchers submitted a lay-language research proposal summary that the committee reviewed in advance. The proposals were presented at 3-monthly PRAGMATIC meetings with the committee providing written and verbal feedback. After each meeting, researchers completed a questionnaire capturing the number, type, acceptability, and helpfulness of the committee's feedback. Reporting followed recommended PPI reporting standards (GRIPP2-LF).
Results:
PRAGMATIC reviewed seven projects and generated 26 potentially actionable feedback. Researchers included two nurses, one medical student, one research associate, and three primary care physicians. Project topics included asthma, postnatal mental health, hearing loss, cervical cancer screening, female smoking, and osteoarthritis. The researchers accepted majority of the feedback (21/26, 80.8%) and rated them as helpful (24/26, 92.3%). The most impact was observed in intervention design and data collection, where feedback led to the adoption of remote interviews, reduced intervention duration, and medical device software refinement. Feedback on participant selection were less accepted but led to improved methodological justification.
Conclusion:
Initial evaluations indicate that a structured PPI programme can positively shape study design and implementation in primary care research. These findings are encouraging and have potential to inform future refinements to guide PPI in research.
Patient Or Public Contribution:
PPI partners were involved in the co-design of study materials, ensuring their clarity, relevance, and acceptability to participants.
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
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score (PRIUS): A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation III: PIE
Patient-centered Care
Nursing Evaluation
Section...
Guidelines 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...
Primary Healthcare Services
In 1978, international leaders convened in Alma-Ata, Kazakhstan, for what would be a pivotal event in global health. The Alma-Ata Declaration was the first to call...
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching III: Evaluation and Documentation
Nurses can use several methods to evaluate patient outcomes. For example, oral questions can assess cognitive learning, patient...