Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex r...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration: a theory-informed evaluation

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration: a theory-informed evaluation. / Ward, Fiona; Popay, Jennie; Porroche-Escudero, Ana et al.
In: Health Expectations, Vol. 23, No. 4, 01.08.2020, p. 910-918.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Ward, F, Popay, J, Porroche-Escudero, A, Akeju, D, Ahmed, S, Cloke, J, Khan, K, Hassan, S & Khedmati-Morasae, E 2020, 'Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration: a theory-informed evaluation', Health Expectations, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 910-918. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13070

APA

Vancouver

Ward F, Popay J, Porroche-Escudero A, Akeju D, Ahmed S, Cloke J et al. Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration: a theory-informed evaluation. Health Expectations. 2020 Aug 1;23(4):910-918. Epub 2020 May 19. doi: 10.1111/hex.13070

Author

Bibtex

@article{d2d0419eab674ce58506d526b769aa8b,
title = "Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration: a theory-informed evaluation",
abstract = "IntroductionThere is an extensive literature on public involvement (PI) in research, but this has focused primarily on experiences for researchers and public contributors and factors enabling or restricting successful involvement in specific projects. There has been less consideration of a {\textquoteleft}whole system{\textquoteright} approach to embedding PI across an organization from governance structures through to research projects.ObjectiveTo investigate how a combination of two theoretical frameworks, one focused on mainstreaming and the other conceptualizing quality, can illuminate the embedding of positive and influential PI throughout a research organization.MethodsThe study used data from the evaluation of a large UK research collaboration. Primary data were collected from 131 respondents (including Public Advisers, university, NHS and local government staff) via individual and group interviews/workshops. Secondary sources included monitoring data and internal documents.FindingsCLAHRC‐NWC made real progress in mainstreaming PI. An organizational vision and infrastructure to embed PI at all levels were created, and the number and range of opportunities increased; PI roles became more clearly defined and increasingly public contributors felt able to influence decisions. However, the aspiration to mainstream PI throughout the collaboration was not fully achieved: a lack of staff {\textquoteleft}buy‐in{\textquoteright} meant that in some areas, it was not experienced as positively or was absent.ConclusionThe two theoretical frameworks brought a novel perspective, facilitating the investigation of the quality of PI in structures and processes across the whole organization. We propose that combining these frameworks can assist the evaluation of PI research.",
keywords = "community involvement, evaluation, mainstreaming, Public Adviser, public involvement, theoretical framework",
author = "Fiona Ward and Jennie Popay and Ana Porroche-Escudero and Dorcas Akeju and Saiqa Ahmed and Jane Cloke and Koser Khan and Shaima Hassan and Esmaeil Khedmati-Morasae",
year = "2020",
month = aug,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/hex.13070",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "910--918",
journal = "Health Expectations",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration

T2 - a theory-informed evaluation

AU - Ward, Fiona

AU - Popay, Jennie

AU - Porroche-Escudero, Ana

AU - Akeju, Dorcas

AU - Ahmed, Saiqa

AU - Cloke, Jane

AU - Khan, Koser

AU - Hassan, Shaima

AU - Khedmati-Morasae, Esmaeil

PY - 2020/8/1

Y1 - 2020/8/1

N2 - IntroductionThere is an extensive literature on public involvement (PI) in research, but this has focused primarily on experiences for researchers and public contributors and factors enabling or restricting successful involvement in specific projects. There has been less consideration of a ‘whole system’ approach to embedding PI across an organization from governance structures through to research projects.ObjectiveTo investigate how a combination of two theoretical frameworks, one focused on mainstreaming and the other conceptualizing quality, can illuminate the embedding of positive and influential PI throughout a research organization.MethodsThe study used data from the evaluation of a large UK research collaboration. Primary data were collected from 131 respondents (including Public Advisers, university, NHS and local government staff) via individual and group interviews/workshops. Secondary sources included monitoring data and internal documents.FindingsCLAHRC‐NWC made real progress in mainstreaming PI. An organizational vision and infrastructure to embed PI at all levels were created, and the number and range of opportunities increased; PI roles became more clearly defined and increasingly public contributors felt able to influence decisions. However, the aspiration to mainstream PI throughout the collaboration was not fully achieved: a lack of staff ‘buy‐in’ meant that in some areas, it was not experienced as positively or was absent.ConclusionThe two theoretical frameworks brought a novel perspective, facilitating the investigation of the quality of PI in structures and processes across the whole organization. We propose that combining these frameworks can assist the evaluation of PI research.

AB - IntroductionThere is an extensive literature on public involvement (PI) in research, but this has focused primarily on experiences for researchers and public contributors and factors enabling or restricting successful involvement in specific projects. There has been less consideration of a ‘whole system’ approach to embedding PI across an organization from governance structures through to research projects.ObjectiveTo investigate how a combination of two theoretical frameworks, one focused on mainstreaming and the other conceptualizing quality, can illuminate the embedding of positive and influential PI throughout a research organization.MethodsThe study used data from the evaluation of a large UK research collaboration. Primary data were collected from 131 respondents (including Public Advisers, university, NHS and local government staff) via individual and group interviews/workshops. Secondary sources included monitoring data and internal documents.FindingsCLAHRC‐NWC made real progress in mainstreaming PI. An organizational vision and infrastructure to embed PI at all levels were created, and the number and range of opportunities increased; PI roles became more clearly defined and increasingly public contributors felt able to influence decisions. However, the aspiration to mainstream PI throughout the collaboration was not fully achieved: a lack of staff ‘buy‐in’ meant that in some areas, it was not experienced as positively or was absent.ConclusionThe two theoretical frameworks brought a novel perspective, facilitating the investigation of the quality of PI in structures and processes across the whole organization. We propose that combining these frameworks can assist the evaluation of PI research.

KW - community involvement

KW - evaluation

KW - mainstreaming

KW - Public Adviser

KW - public involvement

KW - theoretical framework

U2 - 10.1111/hex.13070

DO - 10.1111/hex.13070

M3 - Journal article

VL - 23

SP - 910

EP - 918

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 4

ER -