Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study

Abstract Background In the UK, there has been a strong drive towards patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research. Its benefits include improvements in the quality, relevance and acceptability of research, and empowerment, self-respect and value for service users. Organisational context c...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Joanne Evans, Stan (Constantina) Papoulias
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-04-01
Series:Research Involvement and Engagement
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40900-020-00185-7
_version_ 1818411953995907072
author Joanne Evans
Stan (Constantina) Papoulias
author_facet Joanne Evans
Stan (Constantina) Papoulias
author_sort Joanne Evans
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background In the UK, there has been a strong drive towards patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research. Its benefits include improvements in the quality, relevance and acceptability of research, and empowerment, self-respect and value for service users. Organisational context can significantly influence the operationalisation of PPI. Research has highlighted power asymmetries between clinicians, researchers and service users. A resistance to power sharing, tokenism and assimilation into the existing culture suggest that a consultative, technocratic form of PPI is operating within health research settings. The aim of the study was to explore the development of PPI within a London based mental health biomedical research centre (BRC) over a period of 10 years from its inception. Methods This qualitative study compared data from 52 organisational documents and 16 semi-structured interviews with staff and service users associated with PPI within the Maudsley BRC. The data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Study design, data collection, analysis and write up were conducted by service user researchers. Results Our analysis showed a picture of increasing activity and acceptance of PPI, its alignment with the broader BRC research agenda, progressive involvement of service users in governance, and the development of a collaborative culture in research processes. The presence of salaried service user researchers in the organisation was key to this progress. However, PPI remained localised and under resourced and there was a reluctance to change working practices which resulted in perceptions of tokenism. Service users faced conflicting expectations and were expected to assimilate rather than challenge the organisation’s ‘biomedical agenda’. Conclusions Service user researchers may play a key role in establishing PPI in a scientific, hierarchical research environment. Adoption of a more democratic approach to involvement would build on the good work already being done and help to transform the culture and research processes. However, such an adoption requires considerable changes to the funding and policy environment orienting health research.
first_indexed 2024-12-14T10:39:37Z
format Article
id doaj.art-92f58d1f645c460682ba6bb0ff47f2ae
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2056-7529
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-14T10:39:37Z
publishDate 2020-04-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Research Involvement and Engagement
spelling doaj.art-92f58d1f645c460682ba6bb0ff47f2ae2022-12-21T23:05:45ZengBMCResearch Involvement and Engagement2056-75292020-04-016111210.1186/s40900-020-00185-7Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative studyJoanne Evans0Stan (Constantina) Papoulias1Department of Psychology, King’s College LondonDepartment of Health Service and Population Research, King’s College LondonAbstract Background In the UK, there has been a strong drive towards patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research. Its benefits include improvements in the quality, relevance and acceptability of research, and empowerment, self-respect and value for service users. Organisational context can significantly influence the operationalisation of PPI. Research has highlighted power asymmetries between clinicians, researchers and service users. A resistance to power sharing, tokenism and assimilation into the existing culture suggest that a consultative, technocratic form of PPI is operating within health research settings. The aim of the study was to explore the development of PPI within a London based mental health biomedical research centre (BRC) over a period of 10 years from its inception. Methods This qualitative study compared data from 52 organisational documents and 16 semi-structured interviews with staff and service users associated with PPI within the Maudsley BRC. The data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Study design, data collection, analysis and write up were conducted by service user researchers. Results Our analysis showed a picture of increasing activity and acceptance of PPI, its alignment with the broader BRC research agenda, progressive involvement of service users in governance, and the development of a collaborative culture in research processes. The presence of salaried service user researchers in the organisation was key to this progress. However, PPI remained localised and under resourced and there was a reluctance to change working practices which resulted in perceptions of tokenism. Service users faced conflicting expectations and were expected to assimilate rather than challenge the organisation’s ‘biomedical agenda’. Conclusions Service user researchers may play a key role in establishing PPI in a scientific, hierarchical research environment. Adoption of a more democratic approach to involvement would build on the good work already being done and help to transform the culture and research processes. However, such an adoption requires considerable changes to the funding and policy environment orienting health research.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40900-020-00185-7Patient and public involvementUser led researchBiomedical researchKnowledge translationMental health
spellingShingle Joanne Evans
Stan (Constantina) Papoulias
Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study
Research Involvement and Engagement
Patient and public involvement
User led research
Biomedical research
Knowledge translation
Mental health
title Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study
title_full Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study
title_fullStr Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study
title_short Between funder requirements and ‘jobbing scientists’: the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre - a qualitative study
title_sort between funder requirements and jobbing scientists the evolution of patient and public involvement in a mental health biomedical research centre a qualitative study
topic Patient and public involvement
User led research
Biomedical research
Knowledge translation
Mental health
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40900-020-00185-7
work_keys_str_mv AT joanneevans betweenfunderrequirementsandjobbingscientiststheevolutionofpatientandpublicinvolvementinamentalhealthbiomedicalresearchcentreaqualitativestudy
AT stanconstantinapapoulias betweenfunderrequirementsandjobbingscientiststheevolutionofpatientandpublicinvolvementinamentalhealthbiomedicalresearchcentreaqualitativestudy