The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation

Greenwood, Kathryn; Robertson, Sam; Vogel, Evelin; Vella, Claire; Ward, Thomas; McGourty, Alison; Sacadura, Cat; Hardy, Amy; Rus-Calafell, Mar; Collett, Nicola; Emsley, Richard; Freeman, Daniel; Fowler, David; Kuipers, Elizabeth; Bebbington, Paul; Dunn, Graham; Patient, SlowMo

doi:10.1111/hex.13362

Cited by 13 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The data collection, analysis, and interpretation were co‐produced with peer researchers, to enhance the methodological rigour and provide a rich subjective perspective, as service users may be more forthcoming when interviewed by peers (Simpson & House, 2002 ), and peer researcher involvement in the analysis may lead to the identification of novel themes and reflections (Gillard et al, 2010 , 2012 ). Further details of the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) processes are described in Greenwood et al, ( 2021 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The service user experience of SlowMo therapy: A co‐produced thematic analysis of service users’ subjective experience

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives SlowMo is the first blended digital therapy for paranoia, showing significant small‐moderate reductions in paranoia in a recent large‐scale randomized controlled trial (RCT). This study explored the subjective service‐user experience of the SlowMo therapy content and design; the experience of the blended therapy approach, including the triangle of the therapeutic alliance; and the experience of the digital aspects of the intervention. Design Qualitative co‐produced sub‐study of an RCT. Methods Participants were 22 adult service users with schizophrenia‐spectrum psychosis and persistent distressing paranoia, who completed at least one SlowMo therapy session and a 24‐week follow‐up, at one of 3 sites in Oxford, London, and Sussex, UK. They were interviewed by peer researchers, using a topic guide co‐produced by the Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) team. The transcribed data were analysed thematically. Multiple coding and triangulation, and lay peer researcher validation were used to reach a consensus on the final theme structure. Results Six core themes were identified: (i) starting the SlowMo journey; (ii) the central role of the supportive therapist; (iii) slowing things down; (iv) value and learning from social connections; (v) approaches and challenges of technology; and (vi) improvements in paranoia and well‐being. Conclusions For these service users, slowing down for a moment was helpful, and integrated into thinking over time. Learning from social connections reflected reduced isolation, and enhanced learning through videos, vignettes, and peers. The central role of the supportive therapist and the triangle of alliance between service user, therapist, and digital platform were effective in promoting positive therapeutic outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The service user experience of SlowMo therapy: A co‐produced thematic analysis of service users’ subjective experience

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The involvement of such experts by experience will help increase the chance that all the different aspects of your trial, such as the intervention itself, the assessment schedule and study information, are acceptable and suitably tailored for the people you wish to engage (see, e.g. Hamilton et al, 2018 for a conceptual framework for such involvement; Dunn, O’Mahen et al, 2019 for a discussion of this in relation to psychological intervention development and Greenwood et al, in press, for an example and detailed description in relation to a specific RCT).…”

Section: Key Components Of Your Trialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Making the leap: From experimental psychopathology to clinical trials

Blackwell

Woud

2022

Journal of Experimental Psychopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One important aim of experimental psychopathology research is to inform development of new interventions derived from basic science. However, testing whether a newly developed intervention is in fact effective requires moving from experimental studies to clinical trials, and this transition can pose many problems. These problems stem not only from the inherent complexity of even the simplest clinical trial but also from differences between experimental psychopathology and clinical trial research that may not always be obvious to researchers immersed in only one of these specialist areas. In this paper, we explore some of these complexities and discuss when a clinical trial may, or may not, be the best next step in the translational process. We then consider some of the ins and outs of clinical trials methodology, from design and planning through to reporting, with the aim of providing a guide for experimental psychopathology researchers thinking of making the leap from their experimental studies of mechanisms to clinical trials of novel interventions. We hope that this can help increase the chance of successful clinical translation and novel treatment development from basic science.

show abstract

“…The most dominant standards include the consideration of and accessibility for all relevant stakeholders, good communication between the subgroups, appreciative cooperation of all parties, and the efficient use of knowledge and resources. 13,[25][26][27][28] Of these standards especially the British National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Standards for Public Involvement 25 and the guidelines by the former NIHR institute INVOLVE 28 have been serving various researchers to evaluate their own efforts of practicing PPIE, 24,29,30 as well as to create concrete frameworks, models, and quality guidance for successful PPIE. 3,15,29,[31][32][33][34][35][36] Various of these studies on PPIE do not only provide theoretical frameworks but also serve as best practice examples themselves since PPIE is both the subject of interest and part of the methodology, by involving patients and the public throughout the entire research process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3,15,29,[31][32][33][34][35][36] Various of these studies on PPIE do not only provide theoretical frameworks but also serve as best practice examples themselves since PPIE is both the subject of interest and part of the methodology, by involving patients and the public throughout the entire research process. 19,29,30,33,[37][38][39] In this context, review papers of studies implementing PPIE highlight the manifold opportunities for PPIE, 15 training for all stakeholders. 29,30,37,[41][42][43][44][45] While the effectiveness of and methods for successful PPIE have accordingly become an increasingly popular research topic, the developed methods are predominantly directed toward adult patients, whereas methods for integrating children into the research process are still lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Good to know – This is PPIE! Development of a training tool for public and patient involvement and engagement in pediatric oncological research

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) in research is still a poorly understood and infrequently practiced concept, although the literature stresses clear benefits for quality of care and research as well as patient satisfaction and empowerment. Aim The presently described project aimed at using different PPIE methods to evaluate the current state of knowledge about and attitude toward PPIE in research among different stakeholders of pediatric oncology in Europe. Based on the findings a tailored training tool directed toward the different stakeholders will be designed. Methods and Results An interdisciplinary steering group developed a mixed‐method 3‐stage process to (1) investigate the current knowledge and attitudes about PPIE using a Europe‐wide cross‐sectional online survey directed toward health care professionals (n = 134) and the patient group (patients, survivors, family members, …) (n = 168). The results were analyzed quantitatively, focusing on group comparisons (t‐tests, X2 tests). (2) In a live workshop with n = 36 participants (HCPs and patient group) dual moderation teams (HCPs and patient experts) guided the exploration of effective ways for practicing PPIE. Despite classifying PPIE as relevant, both HCPs and patients indicated a low level of knowledge about the concept and terminology (patients: t(334) = −2.82, p = .004; HCPs: t(270) = −2.88, p = .004). While HCPs assumed to already be involving patients in many research areas, this was not perceived by the patient group (X2 (1, N = 304) = 42.70, p < .001). HCPs and patients named similar obstacles for implementing PPIE in research, though numerous creative solutions were found during the workshop (engagement). (3) The outcomes were integrated into a training tool (White‐Board movie). Conclusion Although HCPs and patients acknowledge the benefit of PPIE, the presented results highlight the lack of awareness about the concept, and the need for effective tools for researchers to integrate PPIE throughout the entire research process, thereby contributing to a sustainable change within the scientific culture.

show abstract

The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation

Abstract: Background: The SlowMo study demonstrated the effects of SlowMo, an eight-session digitally supported reasoning intervention, on paranoia in a large-scale randomizedcontrolled trial with 362 participants with schizophrenia-spectrum psychosis.

Cited by 13 publications

References 26 publications

The service user experience of SlowMo therapy: A co‐produced thematic analysis of service users’ subjective experience

The service user experience of SlowMo therapy: A co‐produced thematic analysis of service users’ subjective experience

Making the leap: From experimental psychopathology to clinical trials

Good to know – This is PPIE! Development of a training tool for public and patient involvement and engagement in pediatric oncological research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About