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
. 2022 Nov 30;8(1):67.
doi: 10.1186/s40900-022-00402-5.

The role of patient and public involvement in rapid qualitative studies: Can we carry out meaningful PPIE with time pressures?

Katie Gilchrist  1 , Syka Iqbal  2 , Cecilia Vindrola-Padros  3
Affiliations

The role of patient and public involvement in rapid qualitative studies: Can we carry out meaningful PPIE with time pressures?

Katie Gilchrist et al. Res Involv Engagem. .

Abstract

Introduction: Rapid qualitative studies conducted with patient and public involvement can help promote policy-relevant and efficient research. There is a need to understand the experiences of researchers, patients, and members of the public to guide the development of good practice and to determine the extent to which rapid qualitative research can be implemented in PPIE projects.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study to explore the experiences of research teams that carried out studies using rapid techniques with patient and public involvement. We carried out 26 interviews with researchers, coordinators, patients, carers, service users and members of the public.

Results: This study identified needs which related to practical and time constraints. Rapid qualitative research tends to be limited to certain PPIE groups, and particular phases of the research process. Study findings are rarely discussed with PPIE members. The educational needs of rapid qualitative research were also identified. Researchers and PPIE members considered three main issues: a lack of training on patient involvement for researchers, rapid qualitative research training for PPIE members, and the diversity of PPIE members.

Conclusion: We found that rapid researchers were able to involve patients and members of the public in research despite time pressures. The challenges identified in this study can be used to plan future training programmes for researchers and PPIE panel members and develop strategies to recruit PPIE panel members from a wide range of backgrounds.

Public contribution: The research aim was to explore the experiences of those carrying out rapid qualitative studies with PPIE. As such, the participants of this study included patients, carers, service users and members of the public, who were interviewed individually. A lived experienced researcher and PPIE member for a hospital conducted the design, data collection and analysis of the study. The study brief was to interview researchers only. The lived-experience researcher initiated the inclusion of PPIE members as participants, therefore strengthening the study design. We shared the draft report with the PPIE participants for participant validation and to maintain a continuous feedback relationship. This led to addressing key issues in designing and involving PPIE members in more meaningful and equal ways. Whilst there is agreement on activities which centre on PPIE, there is no consensus on how to achieve these in high quality rapid qualitative studies.

Keywords: PPIE; Patient and public engagement; Patient and public involvement; Qualitative research; Rapid research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Involve. Guidance on co-producing a research project: National institute for health research. 2019. [updated 2019; cited 2022 Jun 28] https://www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Copro_Guidance_Feb19.pdf
    1. Mazzucato M. Mission-Oriented Research & Innovation in the European Union 2018. [updated 2019; cited 2022 Jun 23] https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/mazzucato_report_2018.pdf
    1. Hoddinott P, Pollock A, O'Cathain A, Boyer I, Taylor J, MacDonald C, et al. How to incorporate patient and public perspectives into the design and conduct of research. F1000Research. 2018;7:752. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.15162.1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Renedo A, Marston CA, Spyridonidis D, Barlow J. Patient and public involvement in healthcare quality improvement: how organizations can help patients and professionals to collaborate. Public Manag Rev. 2015;17(1):17–34. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2014.881535. - DOI
    1. Reynolds J, Ogden M, Beresford R. Conceptualising and constructing ‘diversity’ through experiences of public and patient involvement in health research. Res Involv Engagem. 2021;7(1):1–53. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00296-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed