Exploring how patients, carers and members of the public are recruited to advisory boards, groups and panels as partners in public and patient involved health research: a scoping review protocol

Abstract

IntroductionEngaging patients, carers and members of the public in health research has become widely recognised as an important approach for bridging the gap between research, and health and social care by increasing the relevance of research for those who benefit from its findings. Specific approaches to engagement vary, but commonly include advisory boards, groups or patient panels that are active throughout all stages of research. The breadth of and optimal strategies for recruiting patients, carers and members of the public to such boards, groups or panels remains unclear. The objective of this manuscript is to identify the breadth of and optimal strategies used to recruit patients, carers and members of the public to advisory boards, groups or panels, within public and patient involvement (PPI) research.Methods and analysisThis review follows the scoping review framework by Peters et al, an elaboration on the framework by Arksey and O’Malley. The search strategy was co-developed among the research team, PPI research experts and a faculty librarian. The review will take place between July 2021 and June 2022. In July and August 2021, eight electronic databases, MEDLINE (PubMed), MEDLINE (OVID), Embase, CINAHL, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, will be explored to capture all available literature. Two independent reviewers will screen articles by title and abstract and then at full text based on predetermined criteria. The data will be presented in a tabular format with a narrative summary discussing how the research findings relate to the overarching research question. A thematic analysis will also be completed using qualitative description, identifying key themes and gaps in the literature.Ethics and disseminationEthics is not required for this review. We aim to disseminate the information gathered through presentations at academic conferences, peer-reviewed publications and consultations with lay audiences.

Nurse champions as street-level bureaucrats: Factors which facilitate innovation, policy making, and reconstruction

“…This could be attained via establishing formal cross-ward, cross-hospital, and cross-professional forums to discuss success and failures. The participation of patients and public representatives in these forums is also imperative ( Koskinas et al, 2022 ). Beyond the effect of such forums in enhancing learning, these forums can directly affect the diversity of nurses’ networks and prevent knowledge stickiness.…”

Recruitment of patients, carers and members of the public to advisory boards, groups and panels in public and patient involved health research: a scoping review

“…We also included grey literature captured via Scopus, such as theses/dissertations and reports. Finally, we reviewed the references from articles selected for the review and extracted any relevant articles 12. The search strategy for all databases is outlined in online supplemental file 2.…”

“…Common approaches include advisory boards, stakeholder groups or patient panels that are active, ideally, throughout all stages of research. However, this involvement process is not easily achievable when recruitment strategies are neither effectively carried out nor well understood 11 12. As described by Morgan et al ,11 variation exists pertaining to how PPI representatives are selected, including the characteristics of these individuals.…”

“…As described in the protocol,12 this scoping review sought to explore the breadth of approaches employed for involving patients, carers and members of the public as partners on health research advisory boards, groups or panels within the context of health and social care services research. Preliminary searches identified papers discussing selection and engagement strategies in PPI specific to stakeholder groups and advisory groups, but did not reveal any literature reviews outlining the breadth of, and optimal strategies used for such recruitment 17–19.…”

Moving from theory to practice: exploring power and power sharing in participatory health research partnerships: a scoping review protocol

“…Only people over the age of 18 will be considered for the study's sample. This is because there are different ethical considerations when involving those under the age of 18 in research (19). The partnership may include individuals or groups of people who are participating in health research and, directly or indirectly, are affected by the results and findings of the research.…”