Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct 22;7(10):e016948.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016948.

Reaching consensus on reporting patient and public involvement (PPI) in research: methods and lessons learned from the development of reporting guidelines

Jo Brett  1 , Sophie Staniszewska  2 , Iveta Simera  3 , Kate Seers  4 , Carole Mockford  2 , Susan Goodlad  5 , Doug Altman  3   6 , David Moher  7 , Rosemary Barber  8 , Simon Denegri  9 , Andrew Robert Entwistle  10 , Peter Littlejohns  11 , Christopher Morris  12 , Rashida Suleman  10 , Victoria Thomas  13 , Colin Tysall  10
Affiliations

Reaching consensus on reporting patient and public involvement (PPI) in research: methods and lessons learned from the development of reporting guidelines

Jo Brett et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is inconsistently reported in health and social care research. Improving the quality of how PPI is reported is critical in developing a higher quality evidence base to gain a better insight into the methods and impact of PPI. This paper describes the methods used to develop and gain consensus on guidelines for reporting PPI in research studies (updated version of the Guidance for Reporting Patient and Public Involvement (GRIPP2)).

Methods: There were three key stages in the development of GRIPP2: identification of key items for the guideline from systematic review evidence of the impact of PPI on health research and health services, a three-phase online Delphi survey with a diverse sample of experts in PPI to gain consensus on included items and a face-to-face consensus meeting to finalise and reach definitive agreement on GRIPP2. Challenges and lessons learnt during the development of the reporting guidelines are reported.

Discussion: The process of reaching consensus is vital within the development of guidelines and policy directions, although debate around how best to reach consensus is still needed. This paper discusses the critical stages of consensus development as applied to the development of consensus for GRIPP2 and discusses the benefits and challenges of consensus development.

Keywords: delphi; methods; patient and public involvement; reporting guideline.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The consensus delphi exercise for GRIPP2.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C, et al. Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic review. Health Expect 2014;17:637–50. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00795.x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mockford C, Staniszewska S, Griffiths F, et al. The impact of patient and public involvement on UK NHS health care: a systematic review. J Qual Health Care 2012;24:28–38. 10.1093/intqhc/mzr066 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Mockford C, et al. The GRIPP checklist: strengthening the quality of patient and public involvement reporting in research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2011;27:391–9. 10.1017/S0266462311000481 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;23:c332. - PMC - PubMed
    1. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007;370:1453–7. 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X - DOI - PubMed