P13-6 Building research partnerships with local government: a qualitative study reviewing five years of a Public Health Intervention Responsive Studies Team [Poster]

Jessiman, Patricia, Campbell, Rona, Robinson, Hannah, Forte, Chloe, Littlecott, Hannah, Hawkins, Jemma ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1998-9547 and Wort, Georgina 2026. P13-6 Building research partnerships with local government: a qualitative study reviewing five years of a Public Health Intervention Responsive Studies Team [Poster]. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 80 (S1) , A25. 10.1136/ukphsc-2026-abstracts.58

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Abstract Background Public Health Intervention Responsive Studies Teams (PHIRST) are academic teams funded to provide rapid evaluations of public health interventions in collaboration with local government. PHIRST Insight coproduced ten evaluations of a diverse range of local public health interventions with local government and public partners, with a focus on maximising impact for local policy and practice. This qualitative study examines local government partners’ and academic researchers’ experience of coproduction, and the perceived impact of studies. Methods This is a qualitative study. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with local government staff (N=13) and the PHIRST academic team (N=12) involved in each of the 10 evaluations. Interview transcripts were analysed using the Framework method of thematic analysis. Results Research undertaken by a PHIRST team was perceived by local government staff to be more robust than that which they could undertake themselves, and successfully addressed a perceived lack of research skills, staff capacity and funding within local government to undertake evaluation activity. Both research and local government respondents believed that they developed successful research partnerships through PHIRST, despite identified challenges of working with an external research team. We found that our evaluations successfully provided evidence that has informed public health policy and practice in local government and more widely. Reported impacts include providing evidence to inform commissioning decisions (including in local authorities beyond those involved in the original PHIRST study), influencing wider programmes of work, and influencing national policy. There remain barriers to impact, including the resource and financial constraints on local government and rapidly changing public health priorities. Conclusion This study found that local government staff perceive a range of benefits from NIHR PHIRST support and that PHIRST Insight evaluations met the aim of the PHIRST scheme in providing timely evidence to inform practice or policy in local government.

Item Type:	Short Communication
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Schools > Social Sciences (Includes Criminology and Education) Research Institutes & Centres > Centre For Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer)
Publisher:	BMJ Publishing Group
ISSN:	1470-2738
Last Modified:	01 May 2026 09:45
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/186733

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item