↓ 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
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 1,117)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
126 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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 126 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 140 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 138 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 19%
Researcher 26 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 17%
Other 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 25 18%
Unknown 19 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 17%
Social Sciences 23 16%
Psychology 15 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 21 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#326,387
of 17,467,242 outputs
Outputs from Health Expectations
#17
of 1,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,435
of 269,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Expectations
#1
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,467,242 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 1,117 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. 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 269,061 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 99% of its contemporaries.