The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation
Open Access
- 28 September 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Health Expectations
- Vol. 25 (1), 191-202
- https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13362
Abstract
Background The SlowMo study demonstrated the effects of SlowMo, an eight-session digitally supported reasoning intervention, on paranoia in a large-scale randomized-controlled trial with 362 participants with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis. Aim The current evaluation aimed to investigate the impact of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in the SlowMo study. Method PPI members were six women and three men from Sussex, Oxford and London with experience of using mental health services for psychosis. They received training and met at least 3-monthly throughout the project. The impact of PPI was captured quantitatively and qualitatively through (i) a PPI log of recommendations and implementation; (ii) written subjective experiences of PPI members; (iii) meeting minutes; and (iv) outputs produced. Results The PPI log revealed 107 recommendations arising from PPI meetings, of which 87 (81%) were implemented. Implementation was greater for recruitment-, data collection- and organization-related actions than for dissemination and emergent innovations. Qualitative feedback revealed impacts on study recruitment, data collection, PPI participants' confidence, knowledge, career aspirations and society more widely. Outputs produced included a film about psychosis that aired on BBC primetime television, novel webpages and journal articles. Barriers to PPI impact included geography, travel, funding, co-ordination and well-being. Discussion A future challenge for PPI impact will be the extent to which peer innovation (innovative PPI-led ideas) can be supported within research study delivery. Patient and Public Contribution Planned Patient and Public Contribution in SlowMo comprised consultation and collaboration in (i) design, (ii) recruitment, (iii) qualitative interviews and analysis of service users' experiences of SlowMo therapy and (iv) dissemination.Keywords
Funding Information
- Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Programme (15/48/21)
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- ‘Is it worth doing?’ Measuring the impact of patient and public involvement in researchResearch Involvement and Engagement, 2015
- A Systematic Review of the Impact of Patient and Public Involvement on Service Users, Researchers and CommunitiesThe Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2014
- Exploring perceived barriers, drivers, impacts and the need for evaluation of public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi studyBMJ Open, 2014
- There is no paradox with PPI in researchJournal of Medical Ethics, 2013
- Hearing the voices of service user researchers in collaborative qualitative data analysis: the case for multiple codingHealth Expectations, 2012
- Mapping the impact of patient and public involvement on health and social care research: a systematic reviewHealth Expectations, 2012
- PPI, paradoxes and Plato: who's sailing the ship?: Table 1Journal of Medical Ethics, 2012
- Can the impact of public involvement on research be evaluated? A mixed methods studyHealth Expectations, 2011
- ‘What difference does it make?’ Finding evidence of the impact of mental health service user researchers on research into the experiences of detained psychiatric patientsHealth Expectations, 2010
- What do I want from health research and researchers when I am a patient?BMJ, 1995