Factors that could be barriers to or facilitators of residents' involvement in research processes
| . | Barrier and facilitator categories . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social factors . | Skills . | Resources . | Care-home organisational factors . | Organisation of the research . | |
| Barriers | Resident low confidence Apprehension to engage into something different Power relations (mentioned in relation to staff and relatives) Researcher and research seen as threatening (to staff) Frustration about complexity and slow progress Lack of trust in confidentiality Low or changing mood of some residents Role conflict of researching in own home | Sensory and communication difficulties Changing health of residents Cognitive impairment resulting in limited skills to participate and negotiate Meetings might be monopolised by one member Lengthy and complex reports can frustrate residents Residents' low energy | Lack of funding for more continuous input Limited time of the researcher (e.g. not available at the weekend, no time for providing feedback) Lack of space to hold meetings | Unsupportive organisational culture Individuals and groups feel isolated from each other Perception that residents’ involvement might slow down decision-making process Dominant person might influence residents | Limited researcher flexibility Ethical protocols excluded and limited participation Researchers reluctance to relinquish control Timing of meetings, e.g. evening Venue of meeting, e.g. not at care home or lack of privacy |
| Facilitators | The development of trust and good relationships Residents’ experiences valued Residents are supported to contribute People are open to change Good commitment from the PPI people Transparency of processes Residents have some control, e.g. some ownership over decisions Assurance that the study will result in progress Assured confidentiality Ensure members can stop at any time without reason | Researchers providing constant encouragement and support to residents Researchers embracing deviant perspectives Researchers using successful examples to illustrate involvement Researchers willing to share control Researchers contactable at all times Making negotiated ground rules Being able to communicate with diverse groups of people Researchers using creative methods to engage residents Researchers being flexible | Funding for honorarium for participants Time to do the groundwork required, e.g. proving information Time to arrange meetings and support residents Suitable venues and space to hold meetings Providing sustenance Financial resources to implement changes identified by the research | Supportive organisational culture Care-home management on board Care-home management willing to change Care-home staff value residents being involved in study | Emergent study design Use topics that really matter to the residents Flexibility in residents’ involvement, e.g. use informal conversations if needed Allow personal ad hoc contact with research team Summarise meeting notes into accessible formats, e.g. posters Send materials out before meetings Recruit researchers who can support older people Recognise multiple stakeholder groups and support marginalised groups |
| . | Barrier and facilitator categories . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social factors . | Skills . | Resources . | Care-home organisational factors . | Organisation of the research . | |
| Barriers | Resident low confidence Apprehension to engage into something different Power relations (mentioned in relation to staff and relatives) Researcher and research seen as threatening (to staff) Frustration about complexity and slow progress Lack of trust in confidentiality Low or changing mood of some residents Role conflict of researching in own home | Sensory and communication difficulties Changing health of residents Cognitive impairment resulting in limited skills to participate and negotiate Meetings might be monopolised by one member Lengthy and complex reports can frustrate residents Residents' low energy | Lack of funding for more continuous input Limited time of the researcher (e.g. not available at the weekend, no time for providing feedback) Lack of space to hold meetings | Unsupportive organisational culture Individuals and groups feel isolated from each other Perception that residents’ involvement might slow down decision-making process Dominant person might influence residents | Limited researcher flexibility Ethical protocols excluded and limited participation Researchers reluctance to relinquish control Timing of meetings, e.g. evening Venue of meeting, e.g. not at care home or lack of privacy |
| Facilitators | The development of trust and good relationships Residents’ experiences valued Residents are supported to contribute People are open to change Good commitment from the PPI people Transparency of processes Residents have some control, e.g. some ownership over decisions Assurance that the study will result in progress Assured confidentiality Ensure members can stop at any time without reason | Researchers providing constant encouragement and support to residents Researchers embracing deviant perspectives Researchers using successful examples to illustrate involvement Researchers willing to share control Researchers contactable at all times Making negotiated ground rules Being able to communicate with diverse groups of people Researchers using creative methods to engage residents Researchers being flexible | Funding for honorarium for participants Time to do the groundwork required, e.g. proving information Time to arrange meetings and support residents Suitable venues and space to hold meetings Providing sustenance Financial resources to implement changes identified by the research | Supportive organisational culture Care-home management on board Care-home management willing to change Care-home staff value residents being involved in study | Emergent study design Use topics that really matter to the residents Flexibility in residents’ involvement, e.g. use informal conversations if needed Allow personal ad hoc contact with research team Summarise meeting notes into accessible formats, e.g. posters Send materials out before meetings Recruit researchers who can support older people Recognise multiple stakeholder groups and support marginalised groups |
Factors that could be barriers to or facilitators of residents' involvement in research processes
| . | Barrier and facilitator categories . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social factors . | Skills . | Resources . | Care-home organisational factors . | Organisation of the research . | |
| Barriers | Resident low confidence Apprehension to engage into something different Power relations (mentioned in relation to staff and relatives) Researcher and research seen as threatening (to staff) Frustration about complexity and slow progress Lack of trust in confidentiality Low or changing mood of some residents Role conflict of researching in own home | Sensory and communication difficulties Changing health of residents Cognitive impairment resulting in limited skills to participate and negotiate Meetings might be monopolised by one member Lengthy and complex reports can frustrate residents Residents' low energy | Lack of funding for more continuous input Limited time of the researcher (e.g. not available at the weekend, no time for providing feedback) Lack of space to hold meetings | Unsupportive organisational culture Individuals and groups feel isolated from each other Perception that residents’ involvement might slow down decision-making process Dominant person might influence residents | Limited researcher flexibility Ethical protocols excluded and limited participation Researchers reluctance to relinquish control Timing of meetings, e.g. evening Venue of meeting, e.g. not at care home or lack of privacy |
| Facilitators | The development of trust and good relationships Residents’ experiences valued Residents are supported to contribute People are open to change Good commitment from the PPI people Transparency of processes Residents have some control, e.g. some ownership over decisions Assurance that the study will result in progress Assured confidentiality Ensure members can stop at any time without reason | Researchers providing constant encouragement and support to residents Researchers embracing deviant perspectives Researchers using successful examples to illustrate involvement Researchers willing to share control Researchers contactable at all times Making negotiated ground rules Being able to communicate with diverse groups of people Researchers using creative methods to engage residents Researchers being flexible | Funding for honorarium for participants Time to do the groundwork required, e.g. proving information Time to arrange meetings and support residents Suitable venues and space to hold meetings Providing sustenance Financial resources to implement changes identified by the research | Supportive organisational culture Care-home management on board Care-home management willing to change Care-home staff value residents being involved in study | Emergent study design Use topics that really matter to the residents Flexibility in residents’ involvement, e.g. use informal conversations if needed Allow personal ad hoc contact with research team Summarise meeting notes into accessible formats, e.g. posters Send materials out before meetings Recruit researchers who can support older people Recognise multiple stakeholder groups and support marginalised groups |
| . | Barrier and facilitator categories . | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Social factors . | Skills . | Resources . | Care-home organisational factors . | Organisation of the research . | |
| Barriers | Resident low confidence Apprehension to engage into something different Power relations (mentioned in relation to staff and relatives) Researcher and research seen as threatening (to staff) Frustration about complexity and slow progress Lack of trust in confidentiality Low or changing mood of some residents Role conflict of researching in own home | Sensory and communication difficulties Changing health of residents Cognitive impairment resulting in limited skills to participate and negotiate Meetings might be monopolised by one member Lengthy and complex reports can frustrate residents Residents' low energy | Lack of funding for more continuous input Limited time of the researcher (e.g. not available at the weekend, no time for providing feedback) Lack of space to hold meetings | Unsupportive organisational culture Individuals and groups feel isolated from each other Perception that residents’ involvement might slow down decision-making process Dominant person might influence residents | Limited researcher flexibility Ethical protocols excluded and limited participation Researchers reluctance to relinquish control Timing of meetings, e.g. evening Venue of meeting, e.g. not at care home or lack of privacy |
| Facilitators | The development of trust and good relationships Residents’ experiences valued Residents are supported to contribute People are open to change Good commitment from the PPI people Transparency of processes Residents have some control, e.g. some ownership over decisions Assurance that the study will result in progress Assured confidentiality Ensure members can stop at any time without reason | Researchers providing constant encouragement and support to residents Researchers embracing deviant perspectives Researchers using successful examples to illustrate involvement Researchers willing to share control Researchers contactable at all times Making negotiated ground rules Being able to communicate with diverse groups of people Researchers using creative methods to engage residents Researchers being flexible | Funding for honorarium for participants Time to do the groundwork required, e.g. proving information Time to arrange meetings and support residents Suitable venues and space to hold meetings Providing sustenance Financial resources to implement changes identified by the research | Supportive organisational culture Care-home management on board Care-home management willing to change Care-home staff value residents being involved in study | Emergent study design Use topics that really matter to the residents Flexibility in residents’ involvement, e.g. use informal conversations if needed Allow personal ad hoc contact with research team Summarise meeting notes into accessible formats, e.g. posters Send materials out before meetings Recruit researchers who can support older people Recognise multiple stakeholder groups and support marginalised groups |
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
