The review revealed the most common stage for PPI was in research planning , and the most common level of involvement was collaboration .
Most studies did not provide evidence of effectiveness or elaborate on the impact of PPI , and they tended to report impact from the research er 's perspective .
Where impact was mentioned , this generally related to increased relevance to the community , empowerment of participants and alterations in study design .
OBJECTIVES Patient and public involvement ( PPI ) is argued to lead to higher quality health research , which is more relatable to and helps empower the public .
We synthesis ed the evidence to look for examples of PPI in health research in low/middle-income countries ( LMICs ) , looking at levels of involvement and impact .
Additionally , we considered the impact of who was undertaking the research on the level of involvement and reported impact .
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) in South Africa: engaging multiple constituents to shape the research question.
Community engagement is an on-going , arduous , and necessary process for developing effective health promotion programs . The challenges are amplified when the particular health issue or research question is not prominent in the consciousness of the targeted community . In this paper , we explore the community-based participatory research ( CBPR ) model as a means to negotiate a mutual agenda between communities and research ers . The paper is focused on the ( perceived ) need for cervical cancer screening in an under-re source d community in Cape Town , South Africa . Cervical cancer is a significant health problem in this community and elsewhere in South Africa . Unlike HIV-AIDS , however , many Black South Africans have not been educated about cervical cancer and the importance of obtaining screening . Many may not consider screening a priority in their lives . Our research included extensive consultations and informal interviews with diverse community and regional stakeholders . Following these , we conducted 27  focus groups and 106 demographic surveys with r and omly selected youth , parents , local health care personnel , educators and school staff . Focus group data were summarized and analyzed cross-sectionally . Community stakeholders were involved throughout this research . Our consultations , interviews , and focus group data were key in identifying the concerns and priorities of the community . By engaging community stakeholders , we developed a research framework that incorporated the community 's concerns and priorities , and stressed the intersecting roles of poverty , violence , and other cultural forces in shaping community members ' health and wellbeing . Community members helped to refocus our research from cervical cancer to ' cervical health , ' a concept that acknowledged the impact on women 's bodies and lives of HIV-AIDS and STDs , sexual violence , poverty , and multiple social problems . We conclude that the research agenda and questions in community-based health research should not be considered immutable . They need to be open to negotiation , creativity , and constant reinvention
The review revealed the most common stage for PPI was in research planning , and the most common level of involvement was collaboration .
Most studies did not provide evidence of effectiveness or elaborate on the impact of PPI , and they tended to report impact from the research er 's perspective .
Where impact was mentioned , this generally related to increased relevance to the community , empowerment of participants and alterations in study design .
OBJECTIVES Patient and public involvement ( PPI ) is argued to lead to higher quality health research , which is more relatable to and helps empower the public .
We synthesis ed the evidence to look for examples of PPI in health research in low/middle-income countries ( LMICs ) , looking at levels of involvement and impact .
Additionally , we considered the impact of who was undertaking the research on the level of involvement and reported impact .