Simes, Elizabeth Francesca; (2021) BRIDGING THE GAP. A mixed methods study exploring the impact of the involvement of researchers with lived experience on a multi-site randomised control trial in the National Probation Service in England and Wales. Doctoral thesis (Ph.D), UCL (University College London).

Preview

Text Simes_10138348_thesis_sig_removed.pdf Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: The involvement of individuals with lived experience of the subject area being studied is a requirement for grant applications in the UK. Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) can lead to the reduction of power differentials and strengthen results. However, there is a lack of conclusive evidence about the impact of PPI on clinical trials. To address this limitation in the evidence-base, this study evaluated if the inclusion of User Voice peer researchers as data collectors in a multi-site randomised control trial in the National Probation Service enhanced the validity of the data collected and the transfer of knowledge between peers and traditional researchers. Methods: In this mixed methods study, trial participants and stakeholders were recruited. Participants were eligible, if they had consented to participate in the clinical trial and completed a research assessment with a peer or research assistant, or worked alongside the peer researchers. Eligible trial participants (n=30) and stakeholders (n=17) completed a semi-structured interview, and an additional sample of trial participants (n=76) completed a self-report scale. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis and an independent samples t-test was conducted for the self-report data. Findings: Five themes were generated for the trial participants and 11 for the stakeholders. Accounts emphasized how shared lived experience can break down barriers to engagement through the creation of automatic common ground. The transfer of knowledge strengthened the trial and was an opportunity for personal development for the peer and traditional researchers. The quantitative findings from the trial participants were positive regardless of the type of researcher they met with, and no significant difference was found. Conclusions: This study supports PPI in clinical trials and highlights how the involvement of researchers with lived experience as data collectors enhances the quality of data. However, adequate clinical supervision should be available for peer researchers in future studies. The approach was mutually beneficial for the peer and traditional researchers and challenged stereotypes associated with being an ex-offender and how knowledge is valued.

Download activity - last month

Export as XMLJSONCSV

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as JSONCSVXML

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Archive Staff Only

View Item