Pierce Maria, Foley Louise, Kiely Bridget, Croke Aisling, Larkin James, Smith Susan M, Clyne Barbara, Murphy Edel
School of Social Policy, Social Work and Social Justice, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
School of Allied Health, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Res Involv Engagem. 2023 Nov 24;9(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s40900-023-00516-4.
Incorporating Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) into doctoral research is valued by PhD funders and scholars. Providing early career researchers with appropriate training to develop skills to conduct meaningful PPI involvement is important. The Health Research Board (HRB) Collaborative Doctoral Award in MultiMorbidity programme (CDA-MM) embedded formal PPI training in its structured education. The four participating PhD scholars established a PPI panel comprising people living with two or more chronic conditions, presenting an opportunity for experiential PPI training. This study aimed to evaluate the process and impact of embedding PPI training in a structured PhD programme.
This study was a longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation, conducted over 24 months (June 2020 to June 2022). A process evaluation provided an understanding of how PPI was embedded and explored the experiences of key stakeholders involved. An impact evaluation assessed the impact of embedding PPI training in the programme. Participants included PhD scholars, PPI contributors and PhD supervisors. The data collection and analysis was led by an independent researcher not aligned with the CDA-MM. Data collection methods included five focus groups, individual interviews (n = 6), an impact log, activity logs and group reflections. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic and content analysis and quantitative data analysed using descriptive statistics.
Embedding formal and experiential PPI training in a structured PhD programme is feasible. Both approaches to training are fundamental to building PPI capacity. Involvement of an experienced and knowledgeable PPI lead throughout is perceived as critical. The PPI panel approach offered a good example of embedded consultation and worked well in a structured PhD programme, providing PhD scholars with ample opportunities for learning about PPI and its implementation. For PPI contributors, culture was the most important indicator of quality and was positively evaluated. Key roles for PhD supervisors were identified. Embedding formal and experiential PPI training impacted positively on many different aspects of individual PhD research projects and on PhD scholars as researchers. There were positive impacts for PPI contributors and PhD supervisors.
Embedding formal and experiential PPI training in a structured PhD programme is a novel approach. The evaluation has identified a number of lessons that can inform future doctoral programmes seeking to embed formal and experiential PPI training.
将公众与患者参与（PPI）纳入博士研究受到博士资助者和学者的重视。为早期职业研究人员提供适当培训以培养开展有意义的PPI参与的技能非常重要。健康研究委员会（HRB）的多重疾病协作博士奖计划（CDA-MM）在其结构化教育中纳入了正式的PPI培训。四位参与的博士学者成立了一个由患有两种或更多种慢性病的人组成的PPI小组，这为体验式PPI培训提供了机会。本研究旨在评估在结构化博士项目中嵌入PPI培训的过程和影响。
本研究是一项为期24个月（2020年6月至2022年6月）的纵向混合方法评估。过程评估有助于了解PPI是如何嵌入的，并探索相关关键利益相关者的经历。影响评估评估了在该项目中嵌入PPI培训的影响。参与者包括博士学者、PPI贡献者和博士导师。数据收集和分析由一名与CDA-MM无关的独立研究人员主导。数据收集方法包括五个焦点小组、个人访谈（n = 6）、影响日志、活动日志和小组反思。定性数据采用主题分析和内容分析，定量数据采用描述性统计分析。
在结构化博士项目中嵌入正式和体验式PPI培训是可行的。两种培训方法对于建立PPI能力都至关重要。始终有一位经验丰富且知识渊博的PPI负责人参与被认为至关重要。PPI小组方法提供了一个嵌入式咨询的良好范例，在结构化博士项目中效果良好，为博士学者提供了大量了解PPI及其实施的机会。对于PPI贡献者而言，文化是质量的最重要指标，并得到了积极评价。确定了博士导师的关键作用。嵌入正式和体验式PPI培训对各个博士研究项目的许多不同方面以及作为研究人员的博士学者都产生了积极影响。对PPI贡献者和博士导师也有积极影响。
在结构化博士项目中嵌入正式和体验式PPI培训是一种新颖的方法。该评估确定了一些经验教训，可为未来寻求嵌入正式和体验式PPI培训的博士项目提供参考。
