Reporting data from a case study of a collaborative systematic review, this paper discusses the impact service user involvement might have on research, and how research might benefit from this.
Methods
This was a qualitative case study. The researcher analysed process data on the collaboration in the form of meeting transcripts and minutes, reflective interviews and the researchers’ own field diary. The review was also compared with two systematic reviews on a similar topic, using the AMSTAR checklist.
Results
The young people had influence at all stages of the review, but most importantly shifted its focus from healthcare to education, emphasising education as an important determinant of health.
Conclusion
Young people involved in this review influenced the researcher’s reviewing as well as the review, which shows that involving service users in research is important in order to reduce researcher bias in social care research.
AldersonPMorrowV (2004) Ethics, Social Research and Consulting with Children and Young People, Barkingside: Barnardo’s.
2.
BarberRBooteJCooperC (2007) Involving consumers successfully in NHS research: A national survey. Health Expectations10: 380–391.
3.
BeckerH (1967) Whose side are we on?Social Problems14: 239–247.
4.
BeresfordP (2005) Developing the theoretical basis for service user/survivor-led research and equal involvement in research. Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale14: 9.
5.
BeresfordPEvansC (1999) Research note: Research and empowerment. British Journal of Social Work29: 671–677.
6.
Boaz A, Ashby JA, Denyer D, et al (2006) A multitude of syntheses: A comparison of five approaches from diverse policy fields. Evidence & Policy 2: 479–502.
7.
BrayeSPreston-ShootM (2005) Emerging from out of the shadows? Service user and carer involvement in systematic reviews. Evidence & Policy1: 173–193.
8.
BrodieIBostockLClaptonJet al. (2009) Improving Educational Outcomes for Looked-After Children and Young People, London: Centre for Excellence and Outcomes in Children and Young People’s Services (C4EO).
9.
BrownlieJ (2009) Researching, not playing, in the public sphere. Sociology43: 699–716.
10.
CareyM (2011) Should I stay or should I go? Practical, ethical and political challenges to ‘service user’ participation within social work research. Qualitative Social Work10: 224–243.
11.
ChristensenP (2004) Children’s participation in ethnographic research: Issues of power and representation. Children & Society18: 165–176.
12.
CollinsHMEvansR (2002) The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science32: 235–285.
13.
DavidM (2002) Problems of participation: The limits of action research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology5: 11–17.
14.
EntwistleVSowdenAWattI (1998) Evaluating interventions to promote patient involvement in decision-making: By what criteria should effectiveness be judged?Journal of Health Services Research and Policy3: 100–107.
15.
EpsteinS (1995) The construction of lay expertise: AIDS activism and the forging of credibility in the reform of clinical trials. Science, Technology & Human Values20: 408–437.
16.
FlemingJ (2011) Young people’s involvement in research: Still a long way to go?Qualitative Social Work10: 207–223. (Online First).
17.
GoughDOliverSThomasJ (2012) An Introduction to Systematic Reviews, London: Sage.
18.
GouldnerA (1968) The sociologist as partisan: Sociology and the welfare state. American Sociologist3: 103–116.
19.
GrahamH (1993) Hardship and Health in Women’s Lives, Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
20.
Hammersley M and Atkinson P (2007) Ethnography: Principles in practice. Routledge, London.
21.
HammersleyM (2001) On ‘systematic’ reviews of research literatures: A ‘narrative’ response to Evans & Benefield. British Educational Research Journal27: 544–554.
22.
HardenA (2006) Extending the boundaries of systematic reviews to integrate different types of study. In: PopayJ (ed.) Moving Beyond Effectiveness in Evidence Synthesis, London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.
23.
LiaboKGrayKMulcahyD (2012) A systematic review of interventions to support looked after children in school. Child & Family Social Work18: 341–353.
24.
Lleras-MuneyA (2005) The relationship between education and adult mortality in the United States. Review of Economic Studies72: 189–221.
25.
McCarryM (2012) Who benefits? A critical reflection of children and young people’s participation in sensitive research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology15: 55–68.
26.
MayallB (2002) Towards a Sociology for Childhood: Thinking from Children’s Lives, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
27.
MilesMBHubermanAM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
OakleyA (2000) Experiments in Knowing: Gender and Method in the Social Sciences, New York, NY: The New Press.
29.
OliverM (1992) Changing the social relations of research production?Disability, Handicap and Society7: 101–114.
30.
OliverSClarke-JonesLReesRet al. (2004) Involving consumers in research and development agenda setting for the NHS: Developing an evidence-based approach. Health Technology Assessment8: 1–148, III–IV.
31.
OliverSLiaboKStewartRet al. (2015) Public involvement in research: Making sense of the diversity. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy20: 45–51.
32.
PeaseB (2002) Rethinking empowerment: A postmodern reappraisal for emancipatory practice. British Journal of Social Work32: 135–147.
33.
PetticrewMRobertsH (2003) Evidence, hierarchies and typologies: Horses for courses. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health57: 527–529.
SheaBJGrimshawJMWellsGAet al. (2007) Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology7: 10.
36.
StaleyK (2009) Exploring Impact: Public Involvement in NHS, Public Health and Social Care Research, Eastleigh: INVOLVE.
37.
StewartRLiaboK (2012) Involvement in research without compromising research quality. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy17: 248–251.
38.
TelfordRBooteJDCooperCL (2004) What does it mean to involve consumers successfully in NHS research? A consensus study. Health Expectations: An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care & Health Policy7: 220.
39.
ThomasJHardenAOakleyAet al. (2004) Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews. BMJ328: 1010–1012.
40.
WengerE (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Wilson SJ, Tanner-Smith EE, Lipsey MW, et al (2011) Dropout prevention and intervention programs: Effects on school completion and dropout among school-aged children and youth. Campbell Systematic Review 7: 8Wright Mills C (1959) The Sociological Imagination. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
42.
YaffeJMontgomeryPHopewellSet al. (2012) Empty reviews: A description and consideration of Cochrane systematic reviews with no included studies. PLoS One7: e36626.
