This practice analysis discusses the benefits and challenges of young advocates with physical disabilities and communication difficulties informing research design.
Critical reflection on practice
The use of advocates helped to inform a PhD project exploring the experience of play for 6–12-year-olds with high levels of physical disability due to cerebral palsy. This enabled the improvement of the study design in terms of participant information, interview questions, and the format of the participant interviews.
Implications for practice
Rigorous and well-designed research has a positive impact upon therapy practice. Researchers should make use of children and young people as advocates in order to enable high-quality research design.
AbdulaiRTOwusu-AnsahA (2014) Essential ingredients of a good research proposal for undergraduate and postgraduate students in the social sciences. Sage Open4(3): 1–15.
2.
BaileySBoddyKBriscoeSet al.(2014) Involving disabled children and young people as partners in research: A systematic review. Child: Care, Health and Development41(4): 505–514.
3.
BooteJWongRBoothA (2012) ‘Talking the talk or walking the walk?’ A bibliometric review of the literature on public involvement in health research published between 1995 and 2009. Health Expectations18(1): 44–57.
4.
BrownlieJAndersonSOrmstonR (2006) Children as Researchers, Edinburgh: Scottish Executive Social Research.
5.
GarfieldSJheetaSHussonFet al.(2016) Lay involvement in the analysis of qualitative data in health services research: A descriptive study. Research Involvement and Engagement2(2): 1–12.
6.
GasonSBlissJJamal-HanjaniMet al.(2015) The value of patient and public involvement in trial design and development. Clinical Oncology27(12): 747–749.
7.
Involve (2012) Briefing notes for researchers: Public involvement in NHS, public health and social care research. London: National Institute for Health Research. Available at: www.invo.org.uk (accessed 20 July 2017).
8.
McLaughlinH (2010) Keeping service user involvement in research honest. British Journal of Social Work40(5): 1591–1608.
9.
MenziesJCMorrisKPDuncanHP (2016) Patient and public involvement in paediatric intensive care research: Considerations, challenges and facilitating factors. Research Involvement and Engagement2(32): 1–16.
10.
MinogueVBonessJBrownAet al.(2005) The impact of service user involvement in research. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance18(2): 103–111.
11.
MjøsundNHErikssonMEspnesGAet al.(2016) Service user involvement enhanced the research quality in a study using interpretive phenomenological analysis – The power of multiple perspectives. Journal of Advanced Nursing73(1): 1–14.
12.
NindMChapmanRSealeJet al.(2015) The conundrum of training and capacity building for people with learning disabilities doing research. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities29(6): 542–551.
13.
NindMFlewittRPaylerJ (2010) The social experience of early childhood for children with learning disabilities: Inclusion, competence and agency. British Journal of Sociology of Education31(6): 653–670.
14.
OliverSLiaboKStewartRet al.(2015) Public involvement in research: Making sense of the diversity. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy20(1): 45–51.
PalisanoRRosenbaumPBartlettDet al.(2007) Gross Motor Function Classification System – Expanded and Revised. CanChild Centre of Childhood Disability Research, Canada: McMaster University.
17.
Payne S (2016) A qualitative study highlighting the association between self-efficacy and outcomes in teenagers with developmental coordination disorder. Challenging the boundaries: European Academy of Childhood Disability 28th Annual conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 1–4 June.
18.
PollardKDonskoyALMoulePet al.(2015) Developing and evaluating guidelines for patient and public involvement (PPI) in research. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance28(2): 141–155.
19.
ShipeeNDDomecqGarcesJPPrutskyLopezGJet al.(2013) Patient and service user engagement in research: A systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expectations18(5): 1151–1166.
20.
StaleyKBucklandSAHayesHet al.(2012) ‘The missing links’: Understanding how context and mechanism influence the impact of public involvement in research. Health Expectations17(6): 755–764.
21.
WatsonDFeilerATarletonB (2014) Involving young disabled people in the research process: The experiences of the PIE research project team. Children & Society28(4): 316–326.
