Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy

Abstract Background The involvement of people with experience of disease, caregivers, and patient representatives as partners in research is growing, but varies by country and research field. This survey aimed to investigate opinions, experience and training needs on Patient and Public Involvement (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Cinzia Colombo, Pasquale Paletta, Antonella Savarese, Sandro Pignata, Paola Mosconi, Elena Biagioli
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-03-01
Series:Research Involvement and Engagement
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00701-7
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850216909771898880
author Cinzia Colombo
Pasquale Paletta
Antonella Savarese
Sandro Pignata
Paola Mosconi
Elena Biagioli
author_facet Cinzia Colombo
Pasquale Paletta
Antonella Savarese
Sandro Pignata
Paola Mosconi
Elena Biagioli
author_sort Cinzia Colombo
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background The involvement of people with experience of disease, caregivers, and patient representatives as partners in research is growing, but varies by country and research field. This survey aimed to investigate opinions, experience and training needs on Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) of clinicians and nurses from two Italian collaborative groups in gynecologic oncology research. Methods This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted through an online self-administered questionnaire addressed to health professionals participating in the Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology (MaNGO), and the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) groups, which comprise Italian reference centres for gynecologic oncology research. Results Out of 108 respondents (13.7% response rate), half knew the term PPI (50.9%), slightly more (60.2%) had PPI experience, and the majority (88.9%) were interested in a training course. Most respondents thought PPI was morally/ethically the right thing to do (63.9%). The main benefits considered were improving patient recruitment and retention in a study (62.9%), and maintaining a connection to the real world (60%). The main negative effects were identifying problems not relevant to clinical research (34.2% of respondents), and involving people who are not representative of the target population (29.6% of respondents). One third thought PPI had no negative effects. The barriers most frequently selected were lack of time, resources and funding (59.2%), and difficulty in expressing scientific terms in lay language (50%). The main requirements were dedicated resources, in terms of services and staff (68.5%), training for researchers (58.3%) and training for public and patient partners (37%). Conclusions This survey provides an insight on PPI in gynecologic oncology in Italy showing that some clinicians in the field of gynecologic oncology are familiar with the term PPI and have had experience with it, but most need and ask for training. Providing a picture of the opinions, experiences and needs of health professionals regarding PPI is a starting point for planning actions to implement it in specific settings. Collaborative groups—such as MaNGO and MITO—can share organizational and professional resources to boost PPI and foster a research culture in this direction.
format Article
id doaj-art-cbdbb481889c485698ba70ee4462d6a9
institution OA Journals
issn 2056-7529
language English
publishDate 2025-03-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series Research Involvement and Engagement
spelling doaj-art-cbdbb481889c485698ba70ee4462d6a92025-08-20T02:08:11ZengBMCResearch Involvement and Engagement2056-75292025-03-0111111110.1186/s40900-025-00701-7Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in ItalyCinzia Colombo0Pasquale Paletta1Antonella Savarese2Sandro Pignata3Paola Mosconi4Elena Biagioli5Laboratory of Medical Research on Consumer Involvement, Department of Medical Epidemiology, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCSLaboratory of Medical Research on Consumer Involvement, Department of Medical Epidemiology, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCSIstituto Nazionale Tumori Regina Elena - IRCCS RomeDepartment of Urology and Gynecology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione G. PascaleLaboratory of Medical Research on Consumer Involvement, Department of Medical Epidemiology, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCSLaboratory of Methodology for Clinical Research, Clinical Oncology Department, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCSAbstract Background The involvement of people with experience of disease, caregivers, and patient representatives as partners in research is growing, but varies by country and research field. This survey aimed to investigate opinions, experience and training needs on Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) of clinicians and nurses from two Italian collaborative groups in gynecologic oncology research. Methods This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted through an online self-administered questionnaire addressed to health professionals participating in the Mario Negri Gynecologic Oncology (MaNGO), and the Multicenter Italian Trials in Ovarian cancer and gynecologic malignancies (MITO) groups, which comprise Italian reference centres for gynecologic oncology research. Results Out of 108 respondents (13.7% response rate), half knew the term PPI (50.9%), slightly more (60.2%) had PPI experience, and the majority (88.9%) were interested in a training course. Most respondents thought PPI was morally/ethically the right thing to do (63.9%). The main benefits considered were improving patient recruitment and retention in a study (62.9%), and maintaining a connection to the real world (60%). The main negative effects were identifying problems not relevant to clinical research (34.2% of respondents), and involving people who are not representative of the target population (29.6% of respondents). One third thought PPI had no negative effects. The barriers most frequently selected were lack of time, resources and funding (59.2%), and difficulty in expressing scientific terms in lay language (50%). The main requirements were dedicated resources, in terms of services and staff (68.5%), training for researchers (58.3%) and training for public and patient partners (37%). Conclusions This survey provides an insight on PPI in gynecologic oncology in Italy showing that some clinicians in the field of gynecologic oncology are familiar with the term PPI and have had experience with it, but most need and ask for training. Providing a picture of the opinions, experiences and needs of health professionals regarding PPI is a starting point for planning actions to implement it in specific settings. Collaborative groups—such as MaNGO and MITO—can share organizational and professional resources to boost PPI and foster a research culture in this direction.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00701-7Patient and public involvementPPIParticipatory researchGynecologic oncologyHealth care professionalsSurvey
spellingShingle Cinzia Colombo
Pasquale Paletta
Antonella Savarese
Sandro Pignata
Paola Mosconi
Elena Biagioli
Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy
Research Involvement and Engagement
Patient and public involvement
PPI
Participatory research
Gynecologic oncology
Health care professionals
Survey
title Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy
title_full Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy
title_fullStr Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy
title_full_unstemmed Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy
title_short Patient and public involvement in research: a survey on experience, opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in Italy
title_sort patient and public involvement in research a survey on experience opinions and training needs of gynecologic oncologists in two collaborative groups in italy
topic Patient and public involvement
PPI
Participatory research
Gynecologic oncology
Health care professionals
Survey
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00701-7
work_keys_str_mv AT cinziacolombo patientandpublicinvolvementinresearchasurveyonexperienceopinionsandtrainingneedsofgynecologiconcologistsintwocollaborativegroupsinitaly
AT pasqualepaletta patientandpublicinvolvementinresearchasurveyonexperienceopinionsandtrainingneedsofgynecologiconcologistsintwocollaborativegroupsinitaly
AT antonellasavarese patientandpublicinvolvementinresearchasurveyonexperienceopinionsandtrainingneedsofgynecologiconcologistsintwocollaborativegroupsinitaly
AT sandropignata patientandpublicinvolvementinresearchasurveyonexperienceopinionsandtrainingneedsofgynecologiconcologistsintwocollaborativegroupsinitaly
AT paolamosconi patientandpublicinvolvementinresearchasurveyonexperienceopinionsandtrainingneedsofgynecologiconcologistsintwocollaborativegroupsinitaly
AT elenabiagioli patientandpublicinvolvementinresearchasurveyonexperienceopinionsandtrainingneedsofgynecologiconcologistsintwocollaborativegroupsinitaly