Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40665420›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025

Five years of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in the development and evaluation of the Pain-at-Work toolkit to support employees' self-management of chronic pain at work.

Holly Blake, Victoria Abbott-Fleming, Sarah Greaves, Sarah Somerset, Wendy J Chaplin, Elaine Wainwright, Karen Walker-Bone

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05838677 (Multicentre Pragmatic Cluster Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial to Assess Potential Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Pain at Work Toolkit in Employees With Chronic or Persistent Pain), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05838677 nacompletednot on this map

Multicentre Pragmatic Cluster Randomised Controlled Feasibility Trial to Assess Potential Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of the Pain at Work Toolkit in Employees With Chronic or Persistent Pain

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of NottinghamRan2023 to 2025Enrolled380ConditionsChronic Pain, Pain, ChronicArmsPain at Work Toolkit, Active control
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Public and Patient Involvement and Engagement in Clinical Trials: A Multi-Perspective Mixed-Methods Evaluation of the ROWTATE Programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Holly BlakeSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. holly.blake@nottingham.ac.uk.
Victoria Abbott-FlemingBurning Nights CRPS Support, Derbyshire, UK.
Sarah GreavesFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Sarah SomersetNIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham, UK.
Wendy J ChaplinSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Elaine WainwrightAberdeen Centre for Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Health (Epidemiology Group), School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Karen Walker-BoneMonash Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/S011897/1Nuffield Foundation's Oliver Bird Fund and Versus Arthritis OBF/FR-000023820
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is essential for the design, delivery and dissemination of high-quality, meaningful research. However, reporting of PPIE contributions is seldom transparent or consistent. We aimed to document and critically reflect on the process of embedding robust PPIE throughout every stage of the research cycle in the co-creation and evaluation of the Pain-at-Work (PAW) Toolkit, a digital resource to support working age adults with self-managing chronic pain at work.

methodsUsing the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP2-SF) checklist we describe and reflect on PPIE input into four phases of the PAW Toolkit development and testing taking place over five years, all co-led by PPIE-partners, including: (1) Co-Creation: with stakeholder consultation (n = 27), surveys with employees (n = 274) and employers (n = 107), expert peer review (n = 40), (2) Prototype Evaluation: with end-user testing (n = 104), end-user interviews (n = 15), expert peer reviews (n = 15), (3) Review and Update: with a public concept mapping exercise (n = 20) and expert peer reviews (n = 15), (4) Feasibility Testing: with PPIE-partners (n = 2), PPIE-members (n = 5), PPIE-contributors (n = 10).

resultsPPIE was successfully embedded at every stage of the research cycle. Our PPIE-partners co-led activities to gather the views of diverse stakeholders (PPIE-contributors) such as healthcare professionals, employers, and people with lived experience of chronic pain. We outline 'how' PPIE took place at each phase, and 'who' was involved in each activity. We describe PPIE results in terms of the impact of PPIE on PAW Toolkit development (Phase 1-3) and the research process (Phase 1-4).

conclusionOur PPIE partnerships and shared decision-making led to the co-creation, update and evaluation of the PAW Toolkit, an intervention which is appropriate, meaningful and relevant to working-age adults living with chronic pain. We present components for successful PPIE, and map our Pain-at-Work PPIE to recommended components. Components for successful PPIE, challenges and mitigations are reflected upon. PPIE enhanced the 'real-world' value of our intervention and methodological rigour of the research processes. Our worked example of PPIE and transferable recommendations could be used to guide other researchers embarking on national or international health research. TRIAL REGISTRATION (PHASE 4): ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05838677; registered 01/05/2023 https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05838677 . INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1- https://doi.org/10.2196/51474 .

Indexed as

Chronic painDigitalInterventionPublic involvementSelf-management.Work

Identifiers

PMID40665420
PMCPMC12261548

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.