Patient and public involvement: Two sides of the same coin or different coins altogether?

Bioethics 33 (6):708-715 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Patient and public involvement (PPI) has gained widespread support in health research and health policy circles, but there is little consensus on the precise meaning or justifications of PPI. We argue that an important step towards clarifying the meaning and justification for PPI is to split apart the familiar acronym and draw a distinction between patient and public involvement. Specifically, we argue that patient involvement should refer to the practice of involving individuals in health research or policy on the basis of their experience with a particular condition, while public involvement should refer to the practice of involving individuals in health policy or research based on their status as members of a relevant population. Analyzing cases from the UK, Australia, and the USA, we show how our proposed distinction can deliver much needed clarity to conversations on PPI, while guiding the development and evaluation of future PPI‐based policies.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,659

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

There is no paradox with PPI in research.Kristina Staley - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (3):186-187.
The person in health care policy development.Janet Wallcraft - 2011 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 17 (2):347-349.


Added to PP

21 (#745,623)

6 months
11 (#350,969)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references