↓ Skip to main content

Public involvement and health research system governance: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
1 policy source
16 tweeters
1 Google+ user


3 Dimensions

Readers on

40 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Public involvement and health research system governance: a qualitative study
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12961-018-0361-6
Pubmed ID

Fiona Alice Miller, Sarah J. Patton, Mark Dobrow, Deborah A. Marshall, Whitney Berta


Interest in public involvement in health research projects has led to increased attention on the coordination of public involvement through research organisations, networks and whole systems. We draw on previous work using the 'health research system' framework to explore organisational actors and stewardship functions relevant to governance for public involvement. To inform efforts in Ontario, Canada, to mobilise public involvement across the provincial health research enterprise, we conducted an exploratory, qualitative descriptive study of efforts in two jurisdictions (England, United Kingdom, and Alberta, Canada) where there were active policy efforts to support public involvement, alongside jurisdiction-wide efforts to mobilise health research. Focusing on the efforts of public sector organisations with responsibility for funding health research, enabling public involvement, and using research results, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 26 expert informants and used a qualitative thematic approach to explore how the involvement of publics in health research has been embedded and supported. We identified three sets of common issues in efforts to advance public involvement. First, the initial aim to embed public involvement leveraged efforts to build self-conscious research 'systems', and mobilised policy guidance, direction, investment and infrastructure. Second, efforts to sustain public involvement aimed to deepen involvement activity and tackle diversity limitations, while managing the challenges of influencing research priorities and forging common purpose on the evaluation of public involvement. Finally, public involvement was itself an influential force, with the potential to reinforce - or complicate - the ties that link actors within research systems, and to support - or constrain - the research system's capacity to serve and strengthen health systems. Despite differences in the two jurisdictions analysed and in the organisation of public involvement within them, the supporters and stewards of public involvement sought to leverage research systems to advance public involvement, anticipated similar opportunities for improvement in involvement processes and identified similar challenges for future involvement activities. This suggests the value of a health research system framework in governance for public involvement, and the importance of public involvement for the success of health research systems and the health systems they aim to serve.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Researcher 5 13%
Other 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 11 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 20%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Social Sciences 6 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2020.
All research outputs
of 15,912,337 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
of 890 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 277,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,912,337 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 890 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,374 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.