Within the United Kingdom (UK), the National Institute for Health and Care Research is the largest funder of health and social care research, and additionally funds research centres that support the development and delivery of research. Each year, award-holders of these research centres are required to write a report about their activities, including a summary of Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) activities. This study aimed to evaluate the PPIE sections of annual reports to identify best practice and challenges; this could inform future delivery of PPIE activities. A framework documentary analysis informed by the six UK Standards for Public Involvement (‘Inclusive opportunities’, ‘Working together’, ‘Support and learning’, ‘Communications’, ‘Impact’ and ‘Governance’) was conducted on 112 reports. A quality improvement framework (‘Insights’) was used to evaluate quality as one of: ‘Welcoming’, ‘Listening’, ‘Learning’ and ‘Leading’. Recommendations from this review were co-developed with stakeholders and public contributors. Reports documented varying levels of quality in PPIE activities which spanned across all six UK Standards. Award-holders either intended to, or were actively working towards, increasing access and inclusivity of public involvement opportunities. Methods of working with public contributors were varied, including virtual and in-person meetings. Most award-holders offered PPIE support and learning opportunities for both public contributors and staff. Some award-holders invited public contributors to co-produce communication plans relating to study materials and research findings. The impact of public involvement was described in terms of benefits to public contributors themselves, and on an organisation and project level. Many award-holders reported inviting public contributors to share decision-making within and about governance structures. This evaluation identified that most annual reports contained evidence of good quality PPIE practice with learning from public contributors. Using the UK Standards and Insights framework enabled exploration of the breadth and quality of PPIE activities. Recommendations include the need for a platform for centres to access and share PPIE best practice and for centres to collaborate with local and national partners to build relationships with the public through inclusive community engagement. Within the United Kingdom (UK) the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) is the largest funder of health and social care research. The NIHR also funds research centres that support the delivery of research studies. Each year, award-holders of these research centres are required to write a report describing their activities. These reports include activities related to Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE). We aimed to evaluate the PPIE sections of these reports to identify best practice and challenges. This could, in turn, inform and aid researchers to enhance their PPIE approaches and improve how they work with the public in research. We looked at 112 reports using the six UK Standards for Public Involvement (these include: ‘Inclusive opportunities’, ‘Working together’, ‘Support and learning’, ‘Communications’, ‘Impact’ and ‘Governance’). We used a quality improvement framework named ‘Insights’ to categorise PPIE practice into one of four levels of increasing quality: ‘Welcoming’, ‘Listening’, ‘Learning’ and ‘Leading’. PPIE activities, of varying quality, covered all six UK Standards. A number of award-holders either intended, or were actively working towards, increasing access and inclusivity of public involvement opportunities. Methods of working with public contributors were varied. Most award-holders offered support and learning opportunities for both PPIE members and staff. Some award-holders invited PPIE members to co-produce communication plans relating to study materials and research findings. The impact of public involvement was described in terms of benefits to PPIE members themselves, and on a project and award-holder level. Many award-holders reported inviting public contributors to share decision-making within and about governance structures. This evaluation identified that the Insights framework was useful in determining the quality of PPIE activities relating to each UK Standard. Recommendations for improving the quality of future PPIE activities were co-developed with staff from different research centres, senior leaders within the NIHR, PPIE leads and public contributors.

中文翻译：

---

使用英国公众参与标准来评估 NIHR 管理的研究中心年度报告中的公众参与部分

在英国 (UK)，国家健康与护理研究所是健康和社会护理研究的最大资助者，还为支持研究开发和交付的研究中心提供资金。每年，这些研究中心的获奖者都需要撰写一份有关其活动的报告，包括患者和公众参与 (PPIE) 活动的摘要。本研究旨在评估年度报告的 PPIE 部分，以确定最佳实践和挑战；这可以为未来 PPIE 活动的实施提供信息。根据英国公共参与六项标准（“包容性机会”、“共同努力”、“支持和学习”、“沟通”、“影响”和“治理”）对 112 份报告进行了框架文件分析。质量改进框架（“洞察”）用于评估质量，包括“欢迎”、“倾听”、“学习”和“领导”之一。此次审查的建议是与利益相关者和公共贡献者共同制定的。报告记录了 PPIE 活动的不同质量水平，涵盖所有六项英国标准。获奖者有意或正在积极努力增加公众参与机会的可及性和包容性。与公共贡献者合作的方法多种多样，包括虚拟会议和面对面会议。大多数获奖者为公共贡献者和工作人员提供 PPIE 支持和学习机会。一些获奖者邀请公共贡献者共同制定与研究材料和研究成果相关的传播计划。公众参与的影响是根据公众贡献者本身的利益以及组织和项目层面来描述的。许多获奖者报告邀请公共贡献者分享治理结构内部和有关治理结构的决策。该评估发现，大多数年度报告都包含向公共贡献者学习的高质量 PPIE 实践的证据。使用英国标准和见解框架可以探索 PPIE 活动的广度和质量。建议包括需要一个平台，供中心获取和分享 PPIE 最佳实践，以及中心与地方和国家合作伙伴合作，通过包容性社区参与与公众建立关系。在英国 (UK)，国家健康与护理研究所 (NIHR) 是健康与社会护理研究的最大资助者。NIHR 还资助支持研究交付的研究中心。每年，这些研究中心的获奖者都需要撰写一份报告来描述他们的活动。这些报告包括与患者和公众参与 (PPIE) 相关的活动。我们的目的是评估这些报告的 PPIE 部分，以确定最佳实践和挑战。反过来，这可以 告知并帮助研究人员增强他们的 PPIE 方法并改善他们在研究中与公众合作的方式。我们使用六项英国公众参与标准（包括：“包容性机会”、“共同努力”、“支持和学习”、“沟通”、“影响”和“治理”）查看了 112 份报告。我们使用名为“洞察”的质量改进框架将 PPIE 实践分为四个质量提高级别之一：“欢迎”、“倾听”、“学习”和“领导”。PPIE 活动的质量参差不齐，涵盖了所有六项英国标准。许多获奖者有意或正在积极努力增加公众参与机会的可及性和包容性。与公共贡献者合作的方法多种多样。大多数获奖者为 PPIE 成员和工作人员提供支持和学习机会。一些获奖者邀请 PPIE 成员共同制定与研究材料和研究成果相关的交流计划。公众参与的影响是根据 PPIE 成员本身的利益以及项目和获奖者级别来描述的。许多获奖者报告邀请公共贡献者分享治理结构内部和有关治理结构的决策。该评估表明，洞察框架对于确定与每项英国标准相关的 PPIE 活动的质量非常有用。提高未来 PPIE 活动质量的建议是与来自不同研究中心的工作人员、NIHR 的高级领导、PPIE 领导和公共贡献者共同制定的。