Table 3.
User and researcher results for question 2: how might patient, family and public involvement work best in the Cicely Saunders Institute?
| Order of priority (for users) | Recommendations | Users (n = 12) |
Researchers (n = 5) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mediana | Quartile (1st–3rd) | Number that ranked this item in their top five | Mediana | Quartile (1st–3rd) | Number that ranked this item in their top five | ||
Most important Least important |
CSI takes the lead role in implementing understanding of palliative care for lay people, ensure people understand the same thing by ‘palliative care’ and get people talking about it | 1.5 | (1–3.5) | 6 | N/A | N/A | 2 |
| Flexible and varied ways to get engaged, flexibility in engagement and different levels of engagement | 3 | (1.5–3) | 7 | 1 | (1–2) | 3 | |
| Well-planned and properly funded (potential guidelines for researchers on patient/family and public involvement) | N/A | N/A | 1 | 2 | (1.5–2.5) | 3 | |
| Wide access, ensuring diversity (aiming for representativeness) and have the facilities to support diversity | N/A | N/A | 5 | 2 | (2–3) | 5 | |
| Collaboration with other organisations and charities, reaching out to people and wide advertising | N/A | N/A | 5 | 5 | (5–5) | 3 | |
N/A: not applicable.
a
Scores are only shown if an item was ranked within the top five by ⩾50% of the respondents. A higher median indicates a more important item.