Search

COB-MS is an eight-session, Cognitive Occupation-Based programme for people with both MS and cognitive difficulty – designed to enhance cognition and daily functioning, through a combination of goal-setting, cognitive strategy engagement, group activities, home-practice activities and one-on-one sessions. This research aims to investigate the acceptability of COB-MS from the perspective of people living with MS, as well as the occupational therapists who facilitated the programme. Two content analyses were conducted on interview data from (n = 11) COB-MS participants and (n = 8) COB-MS facilitators. Thematic analysis was also conducted on the participant interview data. Through a, primary, content analysis, participants reported that the COB-MS provided both a positive experience and quality resources. Qualitative improvement and utilisation of their learning beyond completion of the intervention were also identified. Four themes were identified via, secondary, thematic analysis: (1) Group interaction within COB-MS was vital; (2) Online COB-MS had positive and negative effects on participation; (3) COB-MS as a provider of clarity; and (4) Using learned strategies after the completion of COB-MS. Recommendations for future administration are provided. Findings suggest COB-MS acceptability, as well as appropriateness and feasibility, indicative of progression to a definitive trial in future research. ISRCTN: ISRCTN11462710. Registered on 9 September 2019. Cognitive difficulties associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) impact on daily life activities and are considered invisible MS symptoms. This invisibility and the lack of acknowledgement of such symptoms often adds to the distress experienced by people with MS. Occupational therapists are well-placed to address the daily-life impacts of cognitive difficulties in MS. The COB-MS is an occupation-focused intervention that aims to enhance daily function. The intervention was found to be well-accepted well by people with MS and occupational therapists and can feasibly be delivered in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Histopathology is facing an incipient crisis due its anticipated inability to meet diagnostic demand. One possible way round this problem is the adoption of some of the emerging computer-assisted diagnostic solutions that are capitalising on the expansion of digitised services by alleviating pathologists' workloads. While some of these have been limited to making academic headlines, others have been developed in partnership with industry and are ready to make the transition into clinical testing and adoption by healthcare systems. Given the potentially huge impact of such new technologies on patient diagnoses, it is appropriate to consider the role of patient and public involvement (PPI) in this setting. Unlike other more patient-facing areas of research where PPI activities are well established, pathology is a distinct discipline, traditionally with limited patient interaction and therefore limited scope for PPI activity. We explore the benefits and drawbacks of PPI engagement in digital pathology computer-aided diagnostics and map out PPI's role in appraising the merit of new solutions from a conventional research and development framework. However, our standpoint extends to attributing it a wider, more specialised and authoritative advocacy role in subsequent technology regulatory review and adoption by healthcare services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Public involvement in health and social care research is increasingly prioritized by policy-makers and research funders. Often, the impact of the involvement is described in terms of how it has contributed to the research outcomes and how it has affected the involved members of the public. There is a dearth of studies reporting from the perspective of researchers themselves of having involved members of the public in their research. Nevertheless, there is a general expectation for researchers to accept and embrace public involvement in research. This study aims to explore researchers’ views of involving informal carers in health and social care research. Methods Eleven individual in-depth interviews with researchers in the fields of social work, caring science, health science and medical science constituted the dataset of this qualitative study, inspired by discourse psychology. Results The qualitative data analysis resulted in two interpretative repertoires describing researchers’ views of involving informal carers in research, “Philosophy of Science” and “Personal relationships and growth”. Both repertoires need to be recognized; however, as of today, the Philosophy of Science repertoire is more acknowledged, while the second repertoire describing empathy, relationships and emotions may be viewed as the researcher being “unprofessional”. Further, the findings highlighted the dual perspective of being a researcher and a carer as creating opportunities for growth on the part of the researcher, on both a professional and a personal level. Conclusions Researchers and their research work would benefit from acknowledging, discussing and reporting both interpretative repertoires in their publications, as well as recognizing the benefit of dialectal positions, for example, having a dual perspective as both a researcher and an informal carer.

Background: Public involvement in health and social care research is increasingly prioritized by policy-makers and research funders. Often, the impact of the involvement is described in terms of how it has contributed to the research outcomes and how it has affected the involved members of the public. There is a dearth of studies reporting from the perspective of researchers themselves of having involved members of the public in their research. Nevertheless, there is a general expectation for researchers to accept and embrace public involvement in research. This study aims to explore researchers' views of involving informal carers in health and social care research. Methods: Eleven individual in-depth interviews with researchers in the fields of social work, caring science, health science and medical science constituted the dataset of this qualitative study, inspired by discourse psychology. Results: The qualitative data analysis resulted in two interpretative repertoires describing researchers' views of involving informal carers in research, "Philosophy of Science" and "Personal relationships and growth". Both repertoires need to be recognized; however, as of today, the Philosophy of Science repertoire is more acknowledged, while the second repertoire describing empathy, relationships and emotions may be viewed as the researcher being "unprofessional". Further, the findings highlighted the dual perspective of being a researcher and a carer as creating opportunities for growth on the part of the researcher, on both a professional and a personal level. Conclusions: Researchers and their research work would benefit from acknowledging, discussing and reporting both interpretative repertoires in their publications, as well as recognizing the benefit of dialectal positions, for example, having a dual perspective as both a researcher and an informal carer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What can we learn from the history of Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) in healthcare and research across global jurisdictions? Depending on region and context, the terminology and heritage of involvement in research vary. In this paper, we draw on global traditions to explore dominant themes and key considerations and critiques pertaining to PPI in order to inform a PPI culture shift in Ireland. We then describe the heritage of PPI in Ireland and present the case for combining methodological imperatives with policy drivers to support and encourage meaningful involvement. Specifically, we propose that PPI can be enriched by the theory and processes of participatory health research (PHR); and that implementation requires concurrent capacity building. We conclude with a call for Irish researchers (authors of this paper included) to consider the conceptual complexities and nuances of a participatory approach to build on the policy imperatives driving PPI and to contribute to the international evidence base and research culture. Specifically, we call for Irish health researchers and funders to consider and reflect on: (1) the rich literature of PHR as a resource for enacting meaningful PPI; (2) the roots and origins of varying participatory health research methods; (3) how community/patient groups can lead health research; and (4) co-learning and partnership synergy to create space for both academic and community expertise; and (5) the importance of using standardized reporting tools.

IntroductionPrevious studies have identified “trust” as a key mechanism to achieve sustainable partnerships in participatory health research, which themselves can represent social networks. A recent review discussed the potential for social network analysis to investigate the development and maintenance of trust and its effects on partnership functioning in participatory health research partnerships. This review also recommended considering a comprehensive, nuanced and multidimensional approach to conceptualizing, operationalizing and measuring trust in research partnerships. Thus, this study aims to explore empirically the conceptualizing, operationalizing and measuring of trust in a multidimensional manner, approaching each trust dimension as an individual trust network, as well as combined as an overall trust network.MethodsWe sampled the whole network, recruiting from a newly established network of 57 individuals that must collaborate to achieve a common goal. These individuals represented academic, service and community organizations of an existing participatory partnership, the Public and Patient Involvement Ignite Network in Ireland. Of the 57 individuals invited to take part in the study, 75% (n = 43) individuals completed the network survey. A survey about trust was designed based on literature in the area and was administered via Qualtrics. The survey included eight network questions: one on collaboration, and seven on specific dimensions of trust. From this, we constructed a network for each trust dimension. We compared several core network measures of each to identify structural differences between the dimensions of trust. To statistically validate them, we compared them to a random and preferential null model.ResultsAll the networks had a high reciprocity but were decentralized. Key differences were identified across trust dimensions, particularly in terms of integrity and shared values, visions and goals. None of the networks compared well to the null models indicating participants did not randomly or preferentially (based on how much trust they receive for a particular trust dimension) trust other partners.Discussion/ConclusionThis novel empirical social network analysis of trust in a real-world partnership elucidates the nuances and multidimensional nature of trust. This provides support for expanding this research direction to enhance understanding of and interventions for trust in participatory health research.

IntroductionCerebral palsy (CP) is a lifelong condition, where people may experience complications as they age. Including the views of people with CP through Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) ensures that research into the condition is relevant and meaningful in addressing their concerns. However, there is a lack of evidence on incorporating the voices of adults with CP in the doctoral research process. Therefore, this paper aims to provide an overview of how adults with CP were involved in a doctoral research process during the pandemic.MethodsThis paper describes the PPI process and its impact at various stages of the doctoral research process and reflects on the experiences from the perspective of the doctoral researcher and adults with CP using the INVOLVE Values and Principles framework. Five adults with CP were consulted throughout the doctoral research programme. The data for this paper is a combination of reflection notes, email exchanges, meeting minutes and informal discussions with the PPI team on their experiences of being involved in the PPI process. The content of this paper is informed by GRIPP 2 checklist.ResultsThe doctoral researcher and adult reflections highlighted the value of collaboration and the positive impact on research at each stage of the doctoral research process. Although meetings were adapted due to the pandemic, the values of PPI were adhered to throughout the doctoral research.ConclusionInvolving adults with CP positively impacted the doctoral research process. It is recommended to consider individual access needs to ensure meetings and information are accessible for disabled adults. Our reflective findings and recommendations may help other researchers who plan to involve adults with CP in doctoral research.

Background: People with aphasia have been engaging with research in a variety of ways. There are few descriptions of how they are involved in participatory research methodologies and even fewer reports describe their perspective on participating as co-researchers. Aims: To explore the experiences and reflections of two people with aphasia, BG and MG, on being involved in participatory research studies as co-researchers – the Conversation Partner Programme Evaluation Project and the Friendship and Aphasia Project. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with two people with aphasia about their experiences of engaging in participatory research as co-researchers. Data were analysed thematically. Outcomes & Results: Retrospective reflection by MG and BG resulted in five interlinked themes: Involvement in participatory research processes: “More than a guinea pig” Group process: “It’s us not them … completely different” Flexibility and creativity: new ways to co-generate and co-analyse data Personal transformations and transformative actions arising from the research: “The tortoise wants to be like the hare again” Enhancing quality and meaningfulness: “You get more things out of it for more people” Involvement in participatory research processes: “More than a guinea pig” Group process: “It’s us not them … completely different” Flexibility and creativity: new ways to co-generate and co-analyse dataPersonal transformations and transformative actions arising from the research: “The tortoise wants to be like the hare again” Enhancing quality and meaningfulness: “You get more things out of it for more people” Conclusions: Participatory research methodologies encourage and support non-traditional methods and boundary crossing relationships between academic researchers and people with aphasia. MG and BG’s reflections and recommendations suggest possibilities for enhancing collaboration and equality within our research practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Actissist is a smartphone app designed to deliver an intervention grounded in cognitive behavior therapy for early psychosis. Actissist was developed by a multidisciplinary team of academics, clinicians, experts by experience and software engineers. Actissist has been tested in two trials, the first a proof-of-concept trial where Actissist was safe, acceptable and feasible, the second, a powered randomized controlled trial.Objective: This article describes how our multidisciplinary team designed and developed Actissist. This article describes: (i) how Actissist was informed by initial qualitative interviews and focus groups and an expert reference group; (ii) refinements made to the app based on ongoing user feedback; (iii) successes and challenges encountered; and (iv) learning points and recommendations for involving stakeholders in digital health interventions.Methods: Expert reference group meetings informed the development of Actissist and design of subsequent trials, which included individuals with lived experience of psychosis, clinicians, academics, computer scientists and software engineers. Person-centered stakeholder involvement was promoted using focus groups and qualitative interviews prior to the development of the app, which informed version one of Actissist. Interviews were carried out with participants who had used Actissist. Two further versions of Actissist were developed following additional rounds of testing.Results: Multidisciplinary working throughout the Actissist project led to the development, inclusion and improvement of the app design and content. These changes and features included non-directive and compassionate content, co-designed recovery videos, relaxation exercises, psychoeducation material, ability to “favorite” areas of the app that users found helpful, and goal-setting. Challenges to collaborative working included discrepancies between what stakeholders want and what is technically possible to deliver, resource pressures, trying to deliver desired features within the boundaries of fundamental trial design considerations, and power imbalances associated with multidisciplinary working.Conclusions: The involvement of stakeholders in the design and development and delivery of Actissist has been fundamental to our development approach. Through this collaborative process, we have identified different perspectives and ideas that would have not been generated by the research team alone.Clinical Trial Registrations: Proof-of-concept trial: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN34966555Fully-powered randomized controlled trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN76986679

Background: Actissist is a smartphone app designed to deliver an intervention grounded in cognitive behavior therapy for early psychosis. Actissist was developed by a multidisciplinary team of academics, clinicians, experts by experience and software engineers. Actissist has been tested in two trials, the first a proof-of-concept trial where Actissist was safe, acceptable and feasible, the second, a powered randomized controlled trial. Objective: This article describes how our multidisciplinary team designed and developed Actissist. This article describes: (i) how Actissist was informed by initial qualitative interviews and focus groups and an expert reference group; (ii) refinements made to the app based on ongoing user feedback; (iii) successes and challenges encountered; and (iv) learning points and recommendations for involving stakeholders in digital health interventions. Methods: Expert reference group meetings informed the development of Actissist and design of subsequent trials, which included individuals with lived experience of psychosis, clinicians, academics, computer scientists and software engineers. Person-centered stakeholder involvement was promoted using focus groups and qualitative interviews prior to the development of the app, which informed version one of Actissist. Interviews were carried out with participants who had used Actissist. Two further versions of Actissist were developed following additional rounds of testing. Results: Multidisciplinary working throughout the Actissist project led to the development, inclusion and improvement of the app design and content. These changes and features included non-directive and compassionate content, co-designed recovery videos, relaxation exercises, psychoeducation material, ability to "favorite" areas of the app that users found helpful, and goal-setting. Challenges to collaborative working included discrepancies between what stakeholders want and what is technically possible to deliver, resource pressures, trying to deliver desired features within the boundaries of fundamental trial design considerations, and power imbalances associated with multidisciplinary working. Conclusions: The involvement of stakeholders in the design and development and delivery of Actissist has been fundamental to our development approach. Through this collaborative process, we have identified different perspectives and ideas that would have not been generated by the research team alone. Clinical Trial Registrations: Proof-of-concept trial: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN34966555 Fully-powered randomized controlled trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN76986679 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To date, research into interventions to promote wound healing has been led by scientists, clinicians, industry and academics, each with their own particular area of interest. However, the real experts in this area are the people who live with wounds and their families and heretofore their voice has not influenced or shaped the research agenda. This event aimed to seek patient and carer involvement as experts due to their lived experience in wounds through a partnership approach to identify research priorities and address a lack of patient and carer involvement in wound care research. A roundtable discussion format guided by the Scottish Health Council Participation Toolkit Supporting Patient Focus and Public Involvement in NHS Scotland was utilised. The Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public 2 – Short Form (GRIPP2-SF) guided the reporting process. Key areas for future research were identified and included; Patients and carers prioritised the establishment of support groups and the development of educational resources. Research priorities that emerged included understanding the impact of wounds, pain management, addressing educational needs and quantifying the financial burden on patients and carers of living with a wound. A key conclusion from this roundtable was that patients and their carers expressed a strong interest in further wound care related public and patient involvement events and identified areas for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Poor adherence is a leading cause of apparent resistance to antihypertensive treatment. Recent empirical research has investigated predictors of adherence for primary care patients who are apparently resistant to treatment; however, questions remain regarding the variability in adherence behaviour among this group. This study aimed to investigate factors that may elucidate medication adherence among patients with apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) using qualitative methods. Fourteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients undergoing treatment for aTRH in primary care in the West of Ireland. Patients who self-reported both high and low adherence in a previous quantitative study were purposively sampled. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. A public and patient involvement research group were active partners in developing the study protocol and interview topic guide. Three major themes were identified: beliefs about treatment, habits and routine, and health and health systems. High adherers reported favourable beliefs about antihypertensive treatment that had been validated by experience with taking the treatment over time, described strong medication-taking habits and stable routines, and positive relations with their GP. Low adherers expressed less coherence in their beliefs and used less effective strategies to support their medication-taking in daily life. The current findings are consistent with qualitative studies of adherence in other chronic conditions. Results reflect the difficulty for healthcare practitioners in identifying adherent versus non-adherent patients via conversation, and highlight the importance of accurate adherence assessment. Inception studies may provide an opportunity to better understand adherence behaviour across the illness trajectory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: PET/MRI and PET CT scanning carries an increased psychological burden for patients which may be improved by effective preparation prior to attendance for the procedure. We aimed to devise an online resource for patient benefit prior to PET/MRI and PET/CT scanning. Methods: With the help of patient representatives' the style and content for two patient information films was reviewed at each stage of the process to explain the patient journey. Results: Two patient information films were produced for patients undergoing PET scanning, Positive feedback from healthcare providers and users was obtained. Conclusion: Involvement of patient representatives in the production of an information resource has had a positive impact on the finished product, with potential for increased benefit to patients as a result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At least 50% of chronic disease patients don't follow their care plans, leading to lower health outcomes and higher medical costs. Providing Patient Education Materials (PEMs) to individuals living with a disease can help to overcome these problems. PEMs are especially beneficial for people suffering from multisystemic and underrecognized diseases, such as rare diseases. Congenital disorders of glycosylation (CDG) are ultra-rare diseases, where a need was identified for PEMs in plain language that can clearly explain complex information. Community involvement in the design of PEMs is extremely important for diseases whose needs are underserved, such as rare diseases; however, attempts to involve lay and professional stakeholders are lacking. This paper presents a community-based participatory framework to co-create PEMs for CDG, that is transferable to other diseases. A literature review and questionnaire were performed, and only four articles describing the development of PEMS for rare diseases have been found, which demonstrates a lack of standardized approaches. The framework and PEMs were co-developed with CDG families and will be crucial in increasing health literacy and empowering families. We will close a gap in the creation of PEMs for CDG by delivering these resources in lay language in several languages.

What can we learn from the history of Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) in healthcare and research across global jurisdictions? Depending on region and context, the terminology and heritage of involvement in research vary. In this paper, we draw on global traditions to explore dominant themes and key considerations and critiques pertaining to PPI in order to inform a PPI culture shift in Ireland. We then describe the heritage of PPI in Ireland and present the case for combining methodological imperatives with policy drivers to support and encourage meaningful involvement. Specifically, we propose that PPI can be enriched by the theory and processes of participatory health research (PHR); and that implementation requires concurrent capacity building. We conclude with a call for Irish researchers (authors of this paper included) to consider the conceptual complexities and nuances of a participatory approach to build on the policy imperatives driving PPI and to contribute to the international evidence base and research culture. Specifically, we call for Irish health researchers and funders to consider and reflect on: (1) the rich literature of PHR as a resource for enacting meaningful PPI; (2) the roots and origins of varying participatory health research methods; (3) how community/patient groups can lead health research; and (4) co-learning and partnership synergy to create space for both academic and community expertise; and (5) the importance of using standardized reporting tools., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Gilfoyle, MacFarlane, Hannigan, Niranjan, Hughes and Salsberg.)

Introduction: Previous studies have identified "trust" as a key mechanism to achieve sustainable partnerships in participatory health research, which themselves can represent social networks. A recent review discussed the potential for social network analysis to investigate the development and maintenance of trust and its effects on partnership functioning in participatory health research partnerships. This review also recommended considering a comprehensive, nuanced and multidimensional approach to conceptualizing, operationalizing and measuring trust in research partnerships. Thus, this study aims to explore empirically the conceptualizing, operationalizing and measuring of trust in a multidimensional manner, approaching each trust dimension as an individual trust network, as well as combined as an overall trust network., Methods: We sampled the whole network, recruiting from a newly established network of 57 individuals that must collaborate to achieve a common goal. These individuals represented academic, service and community organizations of an existing participatory partnership, the Public and Patient Involvement Ignite Network in Ireland. Of the 57 individuals invited to take part in the study, 75% ( n = 43) individuals completed the network survey. A survey about trust was designed based on literature in the area and was administered via Qualtrics. The survey included eight network questions: one on collaboration, and seven on specific dimensions of trust. From this, we constructed a network for each trust dimension. We compared several core network measures of each to identify structural differences between the dimensions of trust. To statistically validate them, we compared them to a random and preferential null model., Results: All the networks had a high reciprocity but were decentralized. Key differences were identified across trust dimensions, particularly in terms of integrity and shared values, visions and goals. None of the networks compared well to the null models indicating participants did not randomly or preferentially (based on how much trust they receive for a particular trust dimension) trust other partners., Discussion/conclusion: This novel empirical social network analysis of trust in a real-world partnership elucidates the nuances and multidimensional nature of trust. This provides support for expanding this research direction to enhance understanding of and interventions for trust in participatory health research., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Gilfoyle, Salsberg, McCarthy, MacFarlane and MacCarron.)

Introduction: Cerebral palsy (CP) is a lifelong condition, where people may experience complications as they age. Including the views of people with CP through Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) ensures that research into the condition is relevant and meaningful in addressing their concerns. However, there is a lack of evidence on incorporating the voices of adults with CP in the doctoral research process. Therefore, this paper aims to provide an overview of how adults with CP were involved in a doctoral research process during the pandemic., Methods: This paper describes the PPI process and its impact at various stages of the doctoral research process and reflects on the experiences from the perspective of the doctoral researcher and adults with CP using the INVOLVE Values and Principles framework. Five adults with CP were consulted throughout the doctoral research programme. The data for this paper is a combination of reflection notes, email exchanges, meeting minutes and informal discussions with the PPI team on their experiences of being involved in the PPI process. The content of this paper is informed by GRIPP 2 checklist., Results: The doctoral researcher and adult reflections highlighted the value of collaboration and the positive impact on research at each stage of the doctoral research process. Although meetings were adapted due to the pandemic, the values of PPI were adhered to throughout the doctoral research., Conclusion: Involving adults with CP positively impacted the doctoral research process. It is recommended to consider individual access needs to ensure meetings and information are accessible for disabled adults. Our reflective findings and recommendations may help other researchers who plan to involve adults with CP in doctoral research., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Manikandan, Foley, Gough, Harrington, Wall, Weldon, Ryan, Kerr, Walsh and Fortune.)