Series: Public engagement with research. Part 4: Maximising the benefits of involving the public in research implementation

References

• National Institute for Health and Care Research. Briefing notes for researchers – public involvement in NHS, health and social care research 2021. [cited 2023 Jul 3]. Available from: https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/briefing-notes-for-researchers-public-involvement-in-nhs-health-and-social-care-research/27371#how-to-cite-this-guidance
   Google Scholar
• CoAct. CoAct research cycle 2023. [cited 2023 Jul 3]. Available from: https://coactproject.eu/coact-research-cycle/
   Google Scholar
• Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. Res Involv Engag. 2017;3(1):13. doi:10.1186/s40900-017-0062-2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Proctor EK, Powell BJ, McMillen JC. Implementation strategies: recommendations for specifying and reporting. Implement Sci. 2013;8(1):1. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-8-139.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Burton C, Rycroft-Malone J. An untapped resource: patient and public involvement in implementation: comment on “knowledge mobilization in healthcare organizations: a view from the resource-based view of the firm.” Int J Health Policy Manage. 2015;4(12):845–847. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.150.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rashid A, Thomas V, Shaw T, et al. Patient and public involvement in the development of healthcare guidance: an overview of current methods and future challenges. Patient. 2017;10(3):277–282. doi:10.1007/s40271-016-0206-8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eccles MP, Armstrong D, Baker R, et al. An implementation research agenda. Implement Sci. 2009;4(1):18. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davies HT, Powell AE, Nutley SM. Mobilising knowledge to improve UK health care: learning from other countries and other sectors – a multimethod mapping study. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2015;3(27):1–190. doi:10.3310/hsdr03270.
   Google Scholar
• Francis NA, Phillips R, Wood F, et al. Parents’ and clinicians’ views of an interactive booklet about respiratory tract infections in children: a qualitative process evaluation of the EQUIP randomised controlled trial. BMC Fam Pract. 2013;14(1):182. doi:10.1186/1471-2296-14-182.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong BN, et al. Achieving change in primary care—causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews. Implement Sci. 2016;11(1):1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sullivan JL, Adjognon OL, Engle RL, et al. Identifying and overcoming implementation challenges: experience of 59 noninstitutional long-term services and support pilot programs in the veterans health administration. Health Care Manage Rev. 2018;43(3):193–205. doi:10.1097/HMR.0000000000000152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wensing M, Grol R, Grimshaw J. Improving patient care: the implementation of change in health care. Oxford: Wiley; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Locock L, Boaz A. Drawing straight lines along blurred boundaries: qualitative research, patient and public involvement in medical research, co-production and co-design. Evid Policy. 2019;15(3):409–421.
   Google Scholar
• Swaithes L, Dziedzic K, Finney A, et al. Understanding the uptake of a clinical innovation for osteoarthritis in primary care: a qualitative study of knowledge mobilisation using the i-PARIHS framework. Implement Sci. 2020;15(1):1–19. doi:10.1186/s13012-020-01055-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rycroft-Malone J, Burton C, Wilkinson J, et al. Collective action for knowledge mobilisation: a realist evaluation of the collaborations for leadership in applied health research and care. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2015;3(44):1–166. doi:10.3310/hsdr03440.
   Google Scholar
• Lau R, Stevenson F, Ong BN, et al. Achieving change in primary care—effectiveness of strategies for improving implementation of complex interventions: systematic review of reviews. BMJ Open. 2015;5(12):e009993. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boaz A, Robert G, Locock L, et al. What patients do and their impact on implementation: an ethnographic study of participatory quality improvement projects in English acute hospitals. J Health Organ Manage. 2016;30(2):258–278. PMID: 27052625. doi:10.1108/JHOM-02-2015-0027.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swaithes L, Paskins Z, Quicke JG, et al. Optimising the process of knowledge mobilisation in communities of practice: recommendations from a (multi-method) qualitative study. Implement Sci Commun. 2023;4(1):11. doi:10.1186/s43058-022-00384-1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nilsen P, Bernhardsson S. Context matters in implementation science: a scoping review of determinant frameworks that describe contextual determinants for implementation outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):189. doi:10.1186/s12913-019-4015-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rycroft-Malone J, Wilkinson JE, Burton CR, et al. Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships: a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). Implement Sci. 2011;6(1):1–12. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Powell A, Davies HT, Nutley SM. Facing the challenges of research‐informed knowledge mobilization: ‘practising what we preach’? Public Admin. 2018;96(1):36–52. doi:10.1111/padm.12365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinks C, Carter P, Rhodes C, et al. Patient and public involvement in primary care research - an example of ensuring its sustainability. Res Involv Engage. 2016;2:1–1. (doi:10.1186/s40900-016-0015-1.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dziedzic KS, Healey EL, Porcheret M, et al. Implementing core NICE guidelines for osteoarthritis in primary care with a model consultation (MOSAICS): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2018;26(1):43–53. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2017.09.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiphof D, Vlieland TV, van Ingen R, et al. Joint implementation of guidelines for osteoarthritis in Western Europe: JIGSAW-E in progress in The Netherlands. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2017;25(1):S414. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2017.02.714.
   Google Scholar
• Ward V. Why, whose, what and how? A framework for knowledge mobilisers. Evid Policy: J Res Debate Pract. 2017;13(3):477–497. doi:10.1332/174426416X14634763278725.
   Google Scholar
• Grindell C, Coates E, Croot L, et al. The use of co-production, co-design and co-creation to mobilise knowledge in the management of health conditions: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):877. doi:10.1186/s12913-022-08079-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vernooij RW, Willson M, Gagliardi AR, the members of the Guidelines International Network Implementation Working Group. Characterizing patient-oriented tools that could be packaged with guidelines to promote self-management and guideline adoption: a meta-review. Implement Sci. 2015;11(1):1–13. doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0419-1.
   Google Scholar
• Khalil H. Knowledge translation and implementation science: what is the difference? Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2016;14(2):39–40. doi:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000086.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Araujo de Carvalho I, Beard J, Goodwin J, et al. Knowledge translation framework for ageing and health. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2012. [cited 2023 Jul 26]. Available from: https://www.dcu.ie/sites/default/files/agefriendly/knowledge_translation.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Langley J, Wolstenholme D, Cooke J. ‘Collective making’ as knowledge mobilisation: the contribution of participatory design in the co-creation of knowledge in healthcare. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):585. doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3397-y.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levin B. Thinking about knowledge mobilization: a discussion paper prepared at the request of the Canadian Council on Learning and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Canadian Council on Learning. 2008; [cited 2023 Jul 26]. Available from: https://www.oise.utoronto.ca/rspe/UserFiles/File/KM%20paper%20May%20Symposium%20FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Currie G, White L. Inter-professional barriers and knowledge brokering in an organizational context: the case of healthcare. Organization Studies. 2012;33(10):1333–1361. doi:10.1177/0170840612457617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eccles MP, Mittman BS. Welcome to implementation science. Implement Sci. 2006;1(1). doi:10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Research. Guidance on co-producing a research project NIHR Learning for Involvement. 2021. [cited 2023 Jul 23]. Available from: https://www.learningforinvolvement.org.uk/?opportunity=nihr-guidance-on-co-producing-a-research-project
   Google Scholar
• van den Driest JJ, Schiphof D, Luijsterburg PA, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of duloxetine added to usual care for patients with chronic pain due to hip or knee osteoarthritis: protocol of a pragmatic open-label cluster randomised trial (the DUO trial). BMJ Open. 2017;7(9):e018661. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar