Clarifying the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research: A collaborative rapid realist review process

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Ni She et al_2019_PPI RRR.pdf383.32 kBAdobe PDFDownload
Title: Clarifying the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research: A collaborative rapid realist review process
Authors: Ní Shé, ÉidínMorton, SarahLambert, VeronicaMcCann, AmandaKroll, Thiloet al.
Permanent link: http://hdl.handle.net/10197/10699
Date: 6-Feb-2019
Online since: 2019-05-29T09:34:11Z
Abstract: Objective: Public and patient involvement is increasingly embedded as a core activity in research funding calls and best practice guidelines. However, there is recognition of the challenges that prevail to achieve genuine and equitable forms of engagement. Our objective was to identify the mechanisms and resources that enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups in health and social care research. Methods: A rapid realist review of the literature that included: (a) a systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and Open Grey (2007‐2017); (b) documents provided by expert panel members of relevant journals and grey literature. Six reference panels were undertaken with homeless, women's, transgender, disability and Traveller and Roma organizations to capture local insights. Data were extracted into a theory‐based grid linking context to behaviour change policy categories. Main results: From the review, 20 documents were identified and combined with the reference panel summaries. The expert panel reached consensus about 33 programme theories. These relate to environmental and social planning (7); service provision (6); guidelines (4); fiscal measures (6); communication and marketing (4); and regulation and legislation (6). Conclusions: While there is growing evidence of the merits of undertaking PPI, this rarely extends to the meaningful involvement of seldom heard groups. The 33 programme theories agreed by the expert panel point to a variety of mechanisms and resources that need to be considered. Many of the programme theories identified point to the need for a radical shift in current practice to enable the reciprocal involvement of seldom heard groups.
Funding Details: Health Research Board
Type of material: Journal Article
Publisher: Wiley
Journal: Health Expectations
Copyright (published version): 2019 the Authors
Keywords: Behaviour change wheelCo-designHealth and social care researchPublic and patient involvementRapid realist reviewSeldom heard
DOI: 10.1111/hex.12865
Language: en
Status of Item: Peer reviewed
Appears in Collections:Conway Institute Research Collection
Nursing, Midwifery & Health Systems Research Collection
Medicine Research Collection

Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland. No item may be reproduced for commercial purposes. For other possible restrictions on use please refer to the publisher's URL where this is made available, or to notes contained in the item itself. Other terms may apply.