CRIPACC, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Public Involvement in Research Group, CRIPACC, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK.
Health Expect. 2018 Oct;21(5):899-908. doi: 10.1111/hex.12684. Epub 2018 Apr 14.
Reciprocal relationships between researchers and patient and public involvement (PPI) contributors can enable successful PPI in research. However, research and anecdotal evidence suggest that researchers do not commonly provide feedback to PPI contributors thus preventing them from knowing whether, how or where their contributions were useful to researchers and research overall.
The aim of this study was to explore the variation, types, importance of, and satisfaction with feedback given by researchers to PPI contributors in six PPI groups in England, and identify the barriers to the process of feedback.
An explanatory mixed methods sequential study design with a questionnaire survey followed by semi-structured interviews with researchers and PPI contributors in six PPI groups. PPI contributors were involved in all stages of the research process.
Researchers do not routinely give feedback to PPI contributors. Feedback was found to have different meanings: an acknowledgement, impact and study success and progress. PPI contributors who receive feedback are motivated for further involvement; it supports their learning and development and prompts researchers to reflect on PPI impact. The importance of the role of a PPI lead or coordinator to facilitate the process of providing feedback was also highlighted.
This study found no generic way to give feedback indicating that mutual feedback expectations should be discussed at the outset. PPI feedback needs to become integral to the research process with appropriate time and resources allocated. PPI feedback can be seen as a key indicator of mature, embedded PPI in research.
研究人员与患者和公众参与（PPI）贡献者之间的互惠关系可以使 PPI 在研究中取得成功。然而，研究和传闻证据表明，研究人员通常不会向 PPI 贡献者提供反馈，从而使他们无法了解他们的贡献对研究人员和整个研究的有用程度、方式和地点。
本研究旨在探讨英格兰六个 PPI 小组中研究人员向 PPI 贡献者提供反馈的差异、类型、重要性和满意度，并确定反馈过程中的障碍。
采用解释性混合方法顺序研究设计，首先进行问卷调查，然后对六个 PPI 小组的研究人员和 PPI 贡献者进行半结构化访谈。PPI 贡献者参与了研究过程的所有阶段。
研究人员通常不会向 PPI 贡献者提供反馈。反馈有不同的含义：认可、影响和研究成功与进展。收到反馈的 PPI 贡献者会受到进一步参与的激励；它支持他们的学习和发展，并促使研究人员反思 PPI 的影响。还强调了 PPI 负责人或协调员在促进提供反馈过程中的作用的重要性。
本研究发现没有通用的反馈方式，这表明应该在一开始就讨论相互的反馈期望。PPI 反馈需要成为研究过程的一个组成部分，需要分配适当的时间和资源。PPI 反馈可以被视为研究中成熟、嵌入的 PPI 的关键指标。
