ObjectivePatient and public involvement (PPI) in health research is now well-established, whilst science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) research has shifted from a focus on science communication alone to public engagement (PE) within its research processes. Despite frequently drawing on similar theoretical influences, and practical motivations, there is often a lack of dialogue between such settings meaning shared learning, practice and evidence from these two sectors are rarely pooled.MethodsIn this article, we examine findings from a conceptual review of literature gathered between 1996 and 2019.ResultsAnalyzing 142 peer-reviewed articles, we ascertain shared definitions and concepts in patient and public involvement and public engagement, identifying key differences and similarities.ConclusionThe literature we review supports the notion that, in terms of origins, there are two distinct traditions, one based in science communication and one based in what we describe as public involvement in shared decision-making.InnovationWe find evidence that the two traditions are converging but our work also calls for the need for further conversations between these two settings, which are exploring intersecting issues but from parallel pathways.

Background: Delivering research skills training to health professionals through short, applied sessions outside a formal higher education program, can help fill gaps in training and build research capacity in clinical settings. This has been the endeavor of some of the Applied Research Collaborations funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research in England since 2014. How to evaluate this type of training in terms of the wider impact it may have, has not featured heavily in the literature and methods have largely borrowed from more generic approaches to training evaluation which can over-simplify outcomes and ignore longer-term impacts. Methods: We developed the framework in four stages: mapping potential impacts of our research skills training courses to identify key concepts; shaping into three domains in which impact could be expected, informed by established definitions of research capacity building; testing the initial framework and adapting wording of impacts; refining the framework into a practical tool. Results: The final framework specifies types of impact in three domains of influence - individual, group/organization and health system, and maps these against key questions to guide inquiry, as well as suggested methods for capturing the impact and expected timeframe for each type of impact. Discussion: The framework provides a structure for guiding the evaluation of research training as well as a focus on medium-longer term impacts, encouraging a broader and continuous approach to evaluation. It is hoped this will support educators in other contexts and fields, in the planning of a wider range of training evaluation activities, to capture impact more fully.

Objective: An innovative funding scheme for health care librarians to attend an intensive short course in teaching evidence-based practice was established in the West of England in 2016. This evaluation aims to understand the value of the scheme and the impact of the training opportunity for the librarians, establish an evidence base for continuing with the funding scheme, and inform the development of plans to build additional capacity among health care librarians to provide critical appraisal training. Methods: Seven librarians working in health care system settings were funded by the scheme between 2016 and 2018. Post-course feedback forms gathered initial views on course content and delivery, which informed the development of questions for the qualitative phase of the evaluation. All seven librarians participated in group discussions and individual interviews. Results: The course boosted confidence, provided valuable new skills, and positively impacted careers of the librarians through access to new opportunities. It inspired the development of new approaches to critical appraisal training. An important need was identified among the librarians for more education in teaching. Librarians funded by the scheme have successfully cascaded the training to their colleagues. Conclusion: This evaluation supports the continuation of the funding scheme to further build capacity among health care librarians to teach evidence-based practice. It suggests additional investment in this type of specialist training, as well as in education in teaching skills, would be beneficial for health care librarians. Evidence from this evaluation is informing new plans to support these professionals with the vital service they provide, which contributes to the evidence-based culture of their organizations and to patient outcomes.

Background: Evidence from a range of major public health incidents shows that neighbour-based action can have a critical role in emergency response, assistance and recovery. However, there is little research to date on neighbour-based action during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. This article reports on a survey of people engaged in supporting their neighbours in weeks three and four of the UK COVID-19 lockdown. Methods: Members of area-based and community of interest COVID-19 support groups in the Bristol conurbation were invited to complete an online survey. Of 1,255 people who clicked on the survey link, 862 responded; of these, 539 responses were eligible for analysis. Results: Respondents reported providing a wide range of support that went beyond health information, food and medical prescription assistance, to include raising morale through humour, creativity and acts of kindness and solidarity. A substantial proportion felt that they had become more involved in neighbourhood life following the lockdown and had an interest in becoming more involved in future. Neighbour support spanned all adult age groups, including older people categorised as being at-risk to the virus. With respect to most measures, there were no differences in the characteristics of support between respondents in areas of higher and lower deprivation. However, respondents from more deprived areas were more likely to state that they were involved in supporting certain vulnerable groups. Conclusions: As with previous research on major social upheavals, our findings suggest that responses to the viral pandemic and associated social restrictions may increase existing social and health inequalities, and further research should explore this issue in more depth.

Background: Evidence from a range of major public health incidents shows that neighbour-based action can have a critical role in emergency response, assistance and recovery. However, there is little research to date on neighbour-based action during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. This article reports on a survey of people engaged in supporting their neighbours in weeks three and four of the UK COVID-19 lockdown. Methods: Members of area-based and community of interest COVID-19 support groups in the Bristol conurbation were invited to complete an online survey. Of 1,255 people who clicked on the survey link, 862 responded; of these, 539 responses were eligible for analysis. Results: Respondents reported providing a wide range of support that went beyond health information, food and medical prescription assistance, to include raising morale through humour, creativity and acts of kindness and solidarity. A substantial proportion felt that they had become more involved in neighbourhood life following the lockdown and had an interest in becoming more involved in future. Neighbour support spanned all adult age groups, including older people categorised as being at-risk to the virus. With respect to most measures, there were no differences in the characteristics of support between respondents in areas of higher and lower deprivation. However, respondents from more deprived areas were more likely to state that they were involved in supporting certain vulnerable groups. Conclusions: As with previous research on major social upheavals, our findings suggest that responses to the viral pandemic and associated social restrictions may increase existing social and health inequalities, and further research should explore this issue in more depth.