Using the United Kingdom standards for public involvement to evaluate the impact of public involvement in a multinational clinical study

Seddon, Kathy, Elliott, Jim, Johnson, Miriam, White, Clare, Watson, Max, Nelson, Annmarie ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6075-8425 and Noble, Simon ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5425-2383 2022. Using the United Kingdom standards for public involvement to evaluate the impact of public involvement in a multinational clinical study. Research Involvement and Engagement 7 (1) , 22. 10.1186/s40900-021-00264-3

Preview

PDF - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (602kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background The publication of the United Kingdom (UK) Standards for Public Involvement (PI) (UK Standards) in research drew a clear line in the sand regarding the importance of utilising the unique experience, skills and expertise that lay people may offer to the development, conduct and dissemination of clinical research. The UK Standards provide a benchmark which researchers should aim to achieve, yet its implementation continues to be a step wise iterative process of change management. A recent evaluation by a regional research group has suggested that our understanding of PI is enhanced through reflection on the UK Standards. We report on the utility of PI in the design, conduct and dissemination of the HIDDen study, a national, multicentre clinical study based across three UK centres. Methods A retrospective review of PI within the HIDDen study was conducted using field notes taken by the lead author from interactions throughout their involvement as a lay representative on the study. Key members of the HIDDen study were interviewed and data analysed to explore adherence to the UK Standards. Results There was universal support for PI across the study management group with genuine inclusivity of lay members of the committee. All six of the UK Standards were met to varying degrees. The greatest opportunities lay in ‘working together’ and ‘support and learning’. There were challenges meeting ‘governance’ with evidence of participation in decision making but less evidence of opportunities in management, regulation, leadership. Conclusion This study concurs with previous research supporting the utility of the Standards in the conduct and evaluation of PI in clinical research. To our knowledge this is the first multi-national study to be evaluated against the UK Standards.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Medicine
Additional Information:	This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Publisher:	BioMed Central
ISSN:	2056-7529
Funders:	NIHR
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	26 April 2022
Date of Acceptance:	28 March 2021
Last Modified:	16 May 2023 15:06
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/149378

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item