Abstract
BackgroundThe policy imperative to engage the public and patients in research can be seen as part of a wider shift in the research environment. This study addresses the question: Has there been a shift in attitudes to Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) and Public Engagement in Science (PES) amongst researchers?MethodsAttitudes to PPI and PES within a cluster of three NIHR supported Biomedical Research Centres were explored through in‐depth interviews with 19 researchers.ResultsParticipants distinguished PPI (as an activity involving patients and carers in research projects and programmes) from PES (as an activity that aims to communicate research findings to the public, engage the public with broader issues of science policy or promote a greater understanding of the role of science in society). While participants demonstrated a range of attitudes to these practices, they shared a resistance to sharing power and control of the research process with the public and patients.ConclusionWhile researchers were prepared to engage with the public and patients and listed the advantages of engagement, the study revealed few differences in their underlying attitudes towards the role of society in science (and science in society) to those reported in previous studies. To the participants science remains the preserve of scientists, with patients and the public invited to ‘tinker at the edges’.
Highlights
The policy imperative to engage the public and patients in research can be seen as part of a wider shift in the research environment
This study addresses the question: Has there been a shift in attitudes to Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) and Public Engagement in Science (PES) amongst researchers?
Attitudes to PPI and PES within a cluster of three National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) supported Biomedical Research Centres were explored through in-depth interviews with 19 researchers
Summary
The concepts of Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in research and Public Engagement in Science (PES) have occupied parallel tracks. Boote et al.[8] argue that as UK citizens are financial contributors to and part owners of the NHS they have a right to have a voice in NHS activities and processes, including research Alongside this academic debate, a set of policy initiatives have encouraged greater PPI in health research.[9] There has been a significant investment in PES ( supported by science funders such as the UK Wellcome Trust) and activity by scientists to respond to public concerns about scientific issues. 594 Shifting attitudes to PPI and PES? A Boaz, D Biri and C McKevitt designed to increase engagement with the public and patients and ask: is the shift in policy and practice around PPI and PES reflected in a shift in attitudes amongst researchers?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
