Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability
Abstract Background Awareness of the importance of patient and public involvement (PPI) in ophthalmology research is growing, ensuring studies align with patient priorities and experiences. However, there is limited literature exploring the practicalities and details of how PPI may be conducted with...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2025-08-01
|
| Series: | Research Involvement and Engagement |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00747-7 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849738842488176640 |
|---|---|
| author | Jamie Enoch David Matthews Arevik Ghulakhszian Mandeep Sekhon Tamsin Callaghan David Crabb Christiana Dinah Deanna Taylor |
| author_facet | Jamie Enoch David Matthews Arevik Ghulakhszian Mandeep Sekhon Tamsin Callaghan David Crabb Christiana Dinah Deanna Taylor |
| author_sort | Jamie Enoch |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Awareness of the importance of patient and public involvement (PPI) in ophthalmology research is growing, ensuring studies align with patient priorities and experiences. However, there is limited literature exploring the practicalities and details of how PPI may be conducted within this field. In this case study of PPI within an ophthalmological research project, we aim to provide a transparent, in-depth illustration of how PPI was implemented and helped to shape the Acceptability of Geographic Atrophy INjections (AGAIN) study. The AGAIN study is focused on patients’ perspectives regarding the acceptability of new intravitreal (eye) injection treatments for Geographic Atrophy, an advanced form of age-related macular degeneration. Main text This commentary explores how PPI was undertaken to shape the design of the two work packages of the AGAIN study. In work package 1, the AGAIN pilot, we worked with a group of patient advisors to design materials for a mixed-methods questionnaire. This questionnaire consisted of Likert-type scale questions, semi-structured interview questions, and an elicitation task considering different hypothetical treatment scenarios. Eight patient advisors provided their input into the design of this questionnaire, and we discuss examples of the concrete changes to the research materials based on the advisors’ feedback. In work package 2, we carried out several rounds of consultation with patient advisors to develop a pre-validated quantitative questionnaire on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability. This involved using ‘think-aloud’ techniques to explore the questionnaire’s validity, clarity, and comprehensibility. We discuss some of the challenges that may arise when taking on board divergent points of view, and how to maximise comprehensibility without compromising fidelity to a validated questionnaire. Conclusions Our experience attests to the importance of listening to the insights of patients and those with lived experience in the early stages of designing research, while also ensuring that PPI remains continually integrated throughout the study lifecycle. Our PPI approach evolved in an ad-hoc fashion, and we suggest that given its beneficial impact for our study, PPI should be carefully planned for and adequately resourced in patient-centred ophthalmological research programmes. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-cd89e81e8be844b7b3e963b28a77639e |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2056-7529 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-08-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Research Involvement and Engagement |
| spelling | doaj-art-cd89e81e8be844b7b3e963b28a77639e2025-08-20T03:06:27ZengBMCResearch Involvement and Engagement2056-75292025-08-0111111310.1186/s40900-025-00747-7Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptabilityJamie Enoch0David Matthews1Arevik Ghulakhszian2Mandeep Sekhon3Tamsin Callaghan4David Crabb5Christiana Dinah6Deanna Taylor7Department of Optometry and Visual Sciences, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City St George’s, University of LondonPatient AdvisorOphthalmology Department, Central Middlesex Hospital, London North West Healthcare NHS TrustPopulation Health Research Institute, City St George’s, University of LondonResearch and Development Team, Royal Free London NHS Foundation TrustDepartment of Optometry and Visual Sciences, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City St George’s, University of LondonOphthalmology Department, Central Middlesex Hospital, London North West Healthcare NHS TrustDepartment of Optometry and Visual Sciences, School of Health and Psychological Sciences, City St George’s, University of LondonAbstract Background Awareness of the importance of patient and public involvement (PPI) in ophthalmology research is growing, ensuring studies align with patient priorities and experiences. However, there is limited literature exploring the practicalities and details of how PPI may be conducted within this field. In this case study of PPI within an ophthalmological research project, we aim to provide a transparent, in-depth illustration of how PPI was implemented and helped to shape the Acceptability of Geographic Atrophy INjections (AGAIN) study. The AGAIN study is focused on patients’ perspectives regarding the acceptability of new intravitreal (eye) injection treatments for Geographic Atrophy, an advanced form of age-related macular degeneration. Main text This commentary explores how PPI was undertaken to shape the design of the two work packages of the AGAIN study. In work package 1, the AGAIN pilot, we worked with a group of patient advisors to design materials for a mixed-methods questionnaire. This questionnaire consisted of Likert-type scale questions, semi-structured interview questions, and an elicitation task considering different hypothetical treatment scenarios. Eight patient advisors provided their input into the design of this questionnaire, and we discuss examples of the concrete changes to the research materials based on the advisors’ feedback. In work package 2, we carried out several rounds of consultation with patient advisors to develop a pre-validated quantitative questionnaire on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability. This involved using ‘think-aloud’ techniques to explore the questionnaire’s validity, clarity, and comprehensibility. We discuss some of the challenges that may arise when taking on board divergent points of view, and how to maximise comprehensibility without compromising fidelity to a validated questionnaire. Conclusions Our experience attests to the importance of listening to the insights of patients and those with lived experience in the early stages of designing research, while also ensuring that PPI remains continually integrated throughout the study lifecycle. Our PPI approach evolved in an ad-hoc fashion, and we suggest that given its beneficial impact for our study, PPI should be carefully planned for and adequately resourced in patient-centred ophthalmological research programmes.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00747-7 |
| spellingShingle | Jamie Enoch David Matthews Arevik Ghulakhszian Mandeep Sekhon Tamsin Callaghan David Crabb Christiana Dinah Deanna Taylor Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability Research Involvement and Engagement |
| title | Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability |
| title_full | Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability |
| title_fullStr | Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability |
| title_full_unstemmed | Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability |
| title_short | Implementing patient and public involvement (PPI) in eye research: reflections from developing a research study on Geographic Atrophy treatment acceptability |
| title_sort | implementing patient and public involvement ppi in eye research reflections from developing a research study on geographic atrophy treatment acceptability |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-025-00747-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jamieenoch implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT davidmatthews implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT arevikghulakhszian implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT mandeepsekhon implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT tamsincallaghan implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT davidcrabb implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT christianadinah implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability AT deannataylor implementingpatientandpublicinvolvementppiineyeresearchreflectionsfromdevelopingaresearchstudyongeographicatrophytreatmentacceptability |