Overcoming the disconnect between scientific research and the public

A culture shift to support public involvement and engagement in research

The need to empower people to understand their health and well-being has never been greater. However, current research culture does not necessarily prioritize public involvement and engagement, and many scientists are left under-equipped to reap its benefits. Here, we outline both the positive need for purposeful public involvement and engagement in biomedical research and major systemic challenges. While some of our examples stem from the UK, we believe the learnings from them have global significance.

Public involvement and engagement in scientific research and higher education: the only way is ethics?

BACKGROUND

Involving and engaging the public in scientific research and higher education is slowly becoming the norm for academic institutions in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. Driven by a wide range of stakeholders including regulators, funders, research policymakers and charities public involvement and public engagement are increasingly seen as essential in delivering open and transparent activity that is relevant and positively impacts on our society. It is obvious that any activities involving and engaging members of the public should be conducted safely and ethically. However, it is not clear whether conducting activities ethically means they require ethical approval from a research ethics committee.

MAIN BODY

Although there is some guidance available from government organisations (e.g. the UK Health Research Authority) to suggest ethical approval is not required for such activities, requests from funders and publishers to have ethical approval in place is commonplace in the authors' experience. We explore this using case studies from our own institution.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that any public-facing activity with the purpose to systemically investigate knowledge, attitudes and experiences of members of the public as research and as human participants requires prior approval from an ethics committee. In contrast, engaging and involving members of the public and drawing on lived experience to inform aspects of research and teaching does not. However, lack of clarity around this distinction often results in the academic community seeking ethical approval 'just in case', leading to wasted time and resources and erecting unnecessary barriers for public involvement and public engagement. Instead, ethical issues and risks should be appropriately considered and mitigated by the relevant staff within their professional roles, be it academic or a professional service. Often this can involve following published guidelines and conducting an activity risk assessment, or similar. Moving forward, it is critical that academic funders and publishers acknowledge the distinction and agree on an accepted approach to avoid further exacerbating the problem.

Combining postgraduate research training, public engagement, and primary school science education-a Superbugs Master (MSc) class

Since 2018, the 'Superbugs' initiative at Cardiff University (United Kingdom) has been delivering projects that take a research-driven approach to public engagement, involving rigorous evaluation of the methodologies of delivery and the mechanics of communication. The overall aim of Superbugs is to raise awareness and improve public knowledge of microbiology, infection and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In the present project, four postgraduate students were recruited to undertake research projects as part of their Master of Science (MSc) studies. After a period of literature appraisals, the students chose to focus on the topic of personal and food hygiene and were tasked with collecting information on effective strategies for educating young children. Taking advantage of a focus group of primary school teachers, the students then designed evidence-informed educational activities and the evaluation strategies by which the impact of these would be assessed. A pilot delivery of these activities was carried out in a community setting at a local public library, before final delivery as part of a school outreach workshop. The MSc students produced three new elements of educational material; a story book, a treasure hunt and an interactive card game, primarily built around the concepts of challenge and gamification. Feedback collected from primary school pupils aged 6-7 years old and teachers indicated that the activities developed were successful in both being engaging to young people and resulting in an improved knowledge on the chosen topics. Taken together, we present evidence that postgraduate research training, underpinned by active and service learning, represents a valid and effective way of delivering impactful public engagement. In turn, the experience holds benefit for the students not only in terms of their academic study and core scientific skills, but also their wider appreciation and confidence in being effective engagers and science communicators.

Superbugs online: co-production of an educational website to increase public understanding of the microbial world in, on, and around us

Digital tools and online presence have become a cornerstone in public engagement and involvement strategy and delivery. We here describe the co-production process behind launching a new multilingual resource for schools in the United Kingdom and beyond, jointly between university scientists, engagement professionals, primary and secondary teachers, and web designers. The 'Superbugs' website aims at raising awareness and increasing the public understanding of the microbial world in, on, and around us-with a focus on infection, hygiene, and antimicrobial resistance-and attracted >19,000 online visitors, >33,500 page views, and > 775,000 Twitter impressions over the past 24 months. Superbugs.online is available in English, Welsh, Irish, and Scottish Gaelic, thus making it accessible to everyone in the United Kingdom and Ireland, regardless of the language in which they receive and deliver their science education. The website is easy to navigate and features background information, quizzes, animations, videos, illustrated stories, interactive timelines, games, and protocols for home experiments. All materials are presented in a non-prescriptive way, aimed at allowing flexibility for the materials to be adapted to the individual needs of teachers and pupils alike. Our study has led to a demonstrable impact on the co-production team and on pupils and teachers as key stakeholders, based on a comprehensive evaluation of the co-production process itself, the impact of the end product, and the creation of lasting relationships with stakeholders and co-producers, for the mutual benefit of everyone involved.

Diversity in patient and public involvement in healthcare research and education-Realising the potential

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is an increasing priority in health-related research and education. Attracting and supporting people from different demographic groups to give up their time and get involved is important to help ensure that all parts of society are empowered, represented and their voices heard in decisions that may affect their health and quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

(1) To determine if a demographically diverse cross-section of society would be interested in contributing to healthcare research and education. (2) To understand factors that can act as barriers and enablers to effective and diverse PPI.

METHOD

PPI survey data was collected via engagement events, with the aim of scoping interest in PPI from a diverse public. A Focus Group study involving members of the public, academic and professional service staff, was then conducted to gain a deeper understanding around the barriers and enablers of diversity within PPI.

RESULTS

71% of a diverse rich public indicated they would like to get involved in healthcare research and teaching. 76% of survey respondents indicated that they would be happy to share a personal or family experience of healthcare. The two biggest factors impacting on our cohort getting involved are' availability of time' and 'being aware of PPI opportunities'. These factors may disproportionally affect specific groups. Shared and individual PPI enablers and barriers were identified across all stakeholder groups within the Focus Group Study, as well as generic and novel factors that would impact on an institutions' ability to improve PPI diversity.

CONCLUSION

These data points confirm a demographically diverse public's appetite to get involved in academic health research and teaching. This needs to be recognised and harnessed to ensure public contributor networks are representative of society. Equality Impact Assessments should be undertaken in relation to all PPI opportunities. There is a need to recognise the investment of time and resources required to build mutually beneficial relationships with diverse communities as well as the development of inclusive 'fit for purpose' PPI infrastructures to support the uptake of diverse PPI contributors.

PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study involved members of the public responding to a short survey. Public contributors made up one of the three focus groups. The School of Medicine lead public contributor was also involved in the preparation of this manuscript.