↓ Skip to main content

Is it worth it? Patient and public views on the impact of their involvement in health research and its assessment: a UK-based qualitative interview study

Overview of attention for article published in Health Expectations, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 901)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
132 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
Title
Is it worth it? Patient and public views on the impact of their involvement in health research and its assessment: a UK-based qualitative interview study
Published in
Health Expectations, June 2016
DOI 10.1111/hex.12479
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joanna C. Crocker, Anne-Marie Boylan, Jennifer Bostock, Louise Locock

Abstract

There are mounting calls for robust, critical evaluation of the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research. However, questions remain about how to assess its impact, and whether it should be assessed at all. The debate has thus far been dominated by professionals. To explore the views of PPI contributors involved in health research regarding the impact of PPI on research, whether and how it should be assessed. Qualitative interview study. Thirty-eight PPI contributors involved in health research across the UK. Participants felt that PPI has a beneficial impact on health research. They described various impactful roles, which we conceptualize as the 'expert in lived experience', the 'creative outsider', the 'free challenger', the 'bridger', the 'motivator' and the 'passive presence'. Participants generally supported assessing the impact of PPI, while acknowledging the challenges and concerns about the appropriateness and feasibility of measurement. They expressed a range of views about what impacts should be assessed, by whom and how. Individual feedback on impact was seen as an important driver of improved impact and motivation to stay involved. While there appears to be widespread support for PPI impact assessment among PPI contributors, their views on what to assess and how are diverse. PPI contributors should be involved as equal partners in debates and decisions about these issues. Individual feedback on impact may increase PPI contributors' potential impact and their motivation to stay involved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 132 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 101 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 18%
Student > Master 17 17%
Unspecified 12 12%
Other 8 8%
Other 27 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 19%
Social Sciences 16 16%
Unspecified 14 14%
Psychology 9 9%
Other 16 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 84. 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 16 November 2018.
All research outputs
#207,450
of 13,851,031 outputs
Outputs from Health Expectations
#10
of 901 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,420
of 262,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Expectations
#1
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,851,031 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 901 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 262,392 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.