Researching Sensitive Topics

The Value of Inclusive Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in the Design and Implementation of the Larger Bodies in Radiography Project

Dados Bibliográficos

ID19508680
AutoresAmy Taylor (0000-0002-9959-6662), Hancock Amy (University of Exeter, autor correspondente), A Hancock (0000-0002-7720-6651, Department of Health and Care Professions. South Cloisters University of Exeter Exeter UK), Heales Christine (University of Exeter), Ulett Poppy (University of Exeter), Graham Carolyn (Japan Patent Office), Manning Fay (University of Exeter)
Ano2026
Volume29
Fascículo1
Páginase70563-e70563
Data de publicação2026-02-01
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.70563
PMID41656588
OpenAlexW7128393528
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas1
Referências citadas44

INTRODUCTION: Weight stigma and bias in healthcare are well-documented and can deter individuals from participating in research. These sensitivities often foster distrust, creating barriers to recruitment and engagement. Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) strategies are essential to building trust, enhancing transparency and fostering collaboration with under-represented populations. METHODS: This article presents both stages of the PPIE strategy for the Larger Bodies in Radiography (LBinRAD), a multiphased research project which aims to explore experiences and develop services which support person-centred, compassionate care for individuals with larger bodies across medical imaging and radiotherapy services. Stage 1 involved four individuals with lived experience who contributed to developing a UK-wide survey, disseminated via social media to recruit participants living in larger bodies who had accessed radiographic services. Stage 2 created a pool of 28 PPIE representatives, inviting them to participate in five online focus groups designed to: (i) explore participants' perspectives on key priorities, including widening participation; (ii) co-create belief statements to guide future PPIE activities; and (iii) collaboratively shape subsequent research phases. RESULTS: In Stage One, PPIE consultation shaped language and messaging, leading to the adoption of the term 'larger body' and clarification that body weight data would not be collected. A distinct sub-population identifying as taller than average was also recognised. PPIE representatives recommended targeted outreach to relevant social media groups, significantly improving recruitment reach and inclusivity. In Stage Two, 22 PPIE representatives participated across five focus groups. Listening to their experiences provided valuable insights that helped ensure lived experience remained central to the methodology. These insights informed several key refinements, including broadening inclusion criteria and recruitment locations, exploring language in greater depth, discussing cultural influences, and using varied media and methods to capture data and support co-design. CONCLUSION: PPIE was central to the success of Phase 1, shaping the research process and outcomes. Insights and action points from this collaborative approach will guide Phase 2 and future research development. By centring historically marginalised voices, PPIE enhances research inclusivity, relevance, credibility and impact. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The research was undertaken in partnership with PPIE representatives, and this publication has been co-authored with a representative, who will be a co-applicant for future research funding

Data collection · General partnership · MEDLINE · Patient participation · Public engagement · Public involvement · Research design · Value (mathematics) · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Obesity and Health Practices · Social Media in Health Education