Open AccessPerspectives on public involvement in health research from Singapore: The potential of a supported group model of involvement
Author(s) -
Luna Puerta Lidia,
Bartlam Bernadette,
Sun HsiaoLi Shirley,
Smith Helen E.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
health expectations
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.314
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1369-7625
pISSN - 1369-6513
DOI - 10.1111/hex.13058
Subject(s) - public relations , thematic analysis , empowerment , government (linguistics) , scope (computer science) , openness to experience , public health , community engagement , qualitative research , public involvement , political science , medical education , sociology , psychology , medicine , nursing , social psychology , social science , linguistics , philosophy , computer science , law , programming language
Abstract Background Singapore is an international research hub, with an emphasis on translational clinical research. Despite growing evidence of the positive impact of public involvement (PPI) in research, it remains rare in Singapore. Aims To investigate Singaporean public perspectives around the rationale, role and scope for being involved in health research To identify the potential, challenges, facilitators and strategies for implementing PPI in Singapore.Design Semi‐structured qualitative interviews with members of the public, analysed using thematic framework analysis. Results Twenty people participated. Four main themes emerged: potential benefits; challenges; facilitators; and strategies for implementation. Whilst initially unfamiliar with the concept, all interviewees recognized potential benefits for the research itself and those involved, including researchers. PPI was seen to offer opportunities for public empowerment and strengthening of relationships and understanding between the public, academics and health professionals, resulting in more impactful research. Challenges included a Singaporean culture of passive citizenship and an education system that inculcates deferential attitudes. Facilitators comprised demographic and cultural changes, including trends towards greater individual openness and community engagement. Implementation strategies included formal government policies promoting involvement and informal community‐based collaborative approaches. Conclusion Given the socio‐political framework in Singapore, a community‐based approach has potential to address challenges to PPI and maximize impact. Careful consideration needs to be given to issues of resource and support to enable members of the public to engage in culturally sensitive and meaningful ways that will deliver research best placed to effectively address patient needs.