dc.contributor.author | Brett, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Staniszewska, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Simera, I | |
dc.contributor.author | Seers, K | |
dc.contributor.author | Mockford, C | |
dc.contributor.author | Goodlad, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Altman, D | |
dc.contributor.author | Moher, D | |
dc.contributor.author | Barber, R | |
dc.contributor.author | Denegri, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Entwistle, AR | |
dc.contributor.author | Littlejohns, P | |
dc.contributor.author | Morris, C | |
dc.contributor.author | Suleman, R | |
dc.contributor.author | Thomas, V | |
dc.contributor.author | Tysall, C | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-03-07T12:05:58Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017-10-22 | |
dc.description.abstract | INTRODUCTION: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is inconsistently reported in health and social care research. Improving the quality of how PPI is reported is critical in developing a higher quality evidence base to gain a better insight into the methods and impact of PPI. This paper describes the methods used to develop and gain consensus on guidelines for reporting PPI in research studies (updated version of the Guidance for Reporting Patient and Public Involvement (GRIPP2)). METHODS: There were three key stages in the development of GRIPP2: identification of key items for the guideline from systematic review evidence of the impact of PPI on health research and health services, a three-phase online Delphi survey with a diverse sample of experts in PPI to gain consensus on included items and a face-to-face consensus meeting to finalise and reach definitive agreement on GRIPP2. Challenges and lessons learnt during the development of the reporting guidelines are reported. DISCUSSION: The process of reaching consensus is vital within the development of guidelines and policy directions, although debate around how best to reach consensus is still needed. This paper discusses the critical stages of consensus development as applied to the development of consensus for GRIPP2 and discusses the benefits and challenges of consensus development. | en_GB |
dc.description.sponsorship | This study was funded by RCNRI, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.citation | Vol. 7, pp. e016948 - | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016948 | |
dc.identifier.other | bmjopen-2017-016948 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10871/31923 | |
dc.language.iso | en | en_GB |
dc.publisher | BMJ Publishing Group | en_GB |
dc.relation.url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29061613 | en_GB |
dc.rights | Copyright information: © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ | en_GB |
dc.subject | delphi | en_GB |
dc.subject | methods | en_GB |
dc.subject | patient and public involvement | en_GB |
dc.subject | reporting guideline | en_GB |
dc.title | Reaching consensus on reporting patient and public involvement (PPI) in research: methods and lessons learned from the development of reporting guidelines. | en_GB |
dc.type | Article | en_GB |
dc.date.available | 2018-03-07T12:05:58Z | |
exeter.place-of-publication | England | en_GB |
dc.description | This is the final version of the article. Available from BMJ Publishing Group via the DOI in this record. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2044-6055 | |
dc.identifier.journal | BMJ Open | en_GB |