A Qualitative Exploration of Patient and Public Involvement Experiences in Core Outcome Set Development: Insights From Public Partners and Research Stakeholders
4 affiliations
- 1Department of Child and Public Dental Health Dublin Dental University Hospital, School of Dental Sciences, Trinity College Dublin Dublin Ireland
- 2Irish Neonatal Health Alliance Bray Ireland
- 3Former Family Carer Dublin Ireland
- 4Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Honorary Senior Lecturer in Dentistry University of Manchester Manchester England
Abstract
Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research engages patients and the public in all aspects of the research process, ensuring that the perspectives of those directly affected by healthcare systems are integral to decision‐making processes. PPI is recognised as central to the development of Core Outcome Sets (COS), standardised collections of outcomes that should be reported in all clinical trials. Despite agreement on the importance of PPI, limited evidence exists on the experience of PPI across partners and research stakeholders. This study explored experiences of PPI during the development of a Core Outcome Set (COS) for dental behaviour support (DBS), with recommendations for better practice.
Methods: Qualitative data were collected through semi‐structured group discussions and individual interviews with PPI partners and key research stakeholders who designed, coordinated, or worked alongside the PPI process. Transcripts were analysed using iterative reflexive thematic analysis. Themes were developed and refined through continuous engagement with PPI partners, who provided feedback to shape interpretation and ensure authenticity. Data management and coding were conducted using NVivo (QSR International Pty Ltd, Version 12).
Results: Four themes captured partners' experiences of PPI within COS development. These highlighted the importance of managing expectations, creating a supportive and inclusive environment, and fostering opportunities for shared learning and reflection. Ten participants were interviewed, including PPI partners and key research stakeholders. Partners described how meaningful involvement changed their understanding of research and strengthened the partnership between researchers and the public. Practical recommendations were shared for future PPI engagement in COS studies.
Conclusion: Effective PPI in COS development requires clear role definition, inclusive collaboration, and ongoing reflexivity. A dedicated PPI Coordinator plays a vital role in supporting communication, trust, and PPI partner empowerment, ensuring participants are valued as co‐developers rather than passive reviewers.
Patient and Public Contribution: PPI partners initiated this study, participated as interviewees, supported data interpretation, and co‐authored this paper.
Related
- Fear of falling in parkinson’s disease: a qualitative exploration of patient experiences and coping strategies
- A qualitative exploration of community health workers' roles and motivations in delivering care during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences and community perceptions in rural and urban Delhi, India.
- Experiences of palliative care for patients with pulmonary fibrosis: A qualitative exploration of patients and partners perspectives
- A qualitative exploration of variations in social prescribing in primary care for people living with dementia in England: Barriers and enablers to positive service experiences
- Suicidal ideation, depressive experiences, and resilience among adolescents living with HIV in rural Ghana: a qualitative exploration of psychological experiences and coping
BibTeX
@article{hsu2026qualitative,
title = {{A Qualitative Exploration of Patient and Public Involvement Experiences in Core Outcome Set Development: Insights From Public Partners and Research Stakeholders}},
author = {Shaelynn Hsu and Caoimhin Mac Giolla Phadraig and Tracey Scott and Mandy Daly and Carolyn Akintola and Andrew Geddis‐Regan},
journal = {Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1111/hex.70882},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.70882},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - A Qualitative Exploration of Patient and Public Involvement Experiences in Core Outcome Set Development: Insights From Public Partners and Research Stakeholders
AU - Shaelynn Hsu
AU - Caoimhin Mac Giolla Phadraig
AU - Tracey Scott
AU - Mandy Daly
AU - Carolyn Akintola
AU - Andrew Geddis‐Regan
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/04
JO - Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy
DO - 10.1111/hex.70882
UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.70882
AB - Introduction: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research engages patients and the public in all aspects of the research process, ensuring that the perspectives of those directly affected by healthcare systems are integral to decision‐making processes. PPI is recognised as central to the development of Core Outcome Sets (COS), standardised collections of outcomes that should be reported in all clinical trials. Despite agreement on the importance of PPI, limited evidence exists on the experience of PPI across partners and research stakeholders. This study explored experiences of PPI during the development of a Core Outcome Set (COS) for dental behaviour support (DBS), with recommendations for better practice. Methods: Qualitative data were collected through semi‐structured group discussions and individual interviews with PPI partners and key research stakeholders who designed, coordinated, or worked alongside the PPI process. Transcripts were analysed using iterative reflexive thematic analysis. Themes were developed and refined through continuous engagement with PPI partners, who provided feedback to shape interpretation and ensure authenticity. Data management and coding were conducted using NVivo (QSR International Pty Ltd, Version 12). Results: Four themes captured partners' experiences of PPI within COS development. These highlighted the importance of managing expectations, creating a supportive and inclusive environment, and fostering opportunities for shared learning and reflection. Ten participants were interviewed, including PPI partners and key research stakeholders. Partners described how meaningful involvement changed their understanding of research and strengthened the partnership between researchers and the public. Practical recommendations were shared for future PPI engagement in COS studies. Conclusion: Effective PPI in COS development requires clear role definition, inclusive collaboration, and ongoing reflexivity. A dedicated PPI Coordinator plays a vital role in supporting communication, trust, and PPI partner empowerment, ensuring participants are valued as co‐developers rather than passive reviewers. Patient and Public Contribution: PPI partners initiated this study, participated as interviewees, supported data interpretation, and co‐authored this paper.
SN - 1369-6513
SN - 1369-7625
ER -