In general, public involvement is not research and therefore does not require ethical approval. However, you should still consider ethics and safeguarding when planning your public involvement activity.

If you are involving members of the public in the undertaking of research as co-researchers or peer researchers (e.g. interviewing participants or analysing data), this will require ethical approval as ethics committees want to know that public members will be appropriately trained and supported to undertake these activities.

No, the public members involved in designing your study should not be used as participants. This is because it can introduce bias into your study. Instead, you should have public partners who help to inform or design your study, and a separate group of patients or public members who participate in data collection.

In-person activities can be good for building rapport and doing hands-on tasks. They can also be more accessible for people who are less digitally literate. Online activities work well when you're involving public members from multiple locations, and they can be cheaper to organise. Hybrid meetings can also be a good option, but they require strong facilitation skills to ensure those online are able to contribute at the same level as those in the room. When in doubt, it's always best to ask the public members you're involving for their preferences.

It's helpful to establish ground rules at the start of a meeting to try and prevent this (e.g. listen more than you talk, share the time). If someone is still dominating the conversation, don't be afraid to politely interrupt and ask them to give others a chance to share. You can also offer to follow up with them individually after the meeting if there are things they still want to discuss. You can use the one-to-one chat with them to allow time for self-reflection (e.g. Who did you feel spoke the most during today's meeting? How did this impact the discussion?) and discuss strategies for ensuring everyone is able to get involved (e.g. waiting until at least one other person has spoken before sharing your thoughts; setting time limits for responses).

Offering multiple methods for contributing to the conversation (e.g. writing in the chat) can be helpful for people who don't feel comfortable speaking in front of large groups. Also, making clear that everyone's lived experience is valued and reassuring the group that no research knowledge is required can help people feel more confident sharing their thoughts. If someone is still being quiet, you can ask them a question directly, although you shouldn't push them to give an answer if they don't have one. You can follow up with them after the meeting to ask if there's anything they didn't have a chance to share and to discuss strategies for ensuring they feel comfortable getting involved (e.g. giving the group a few minutes to think silently before asking for responses).

Item descriptionPublic involvement payments (including vouchers) are classed as income and may impact a person’s benefit claim. Reimbursed expenses are not counted as income.

People receiving welfare benefits should seek expert advice and/or permission from the relevant authority (e.g. JobCentre Plus in England) before agreeing to any public involvement activities. Based on the expert advice received, public members may choose to accept payment, request a lower amount of payment, or decline payment altogether.

You can provide public members with a letter to help JobCentre Plus staff understand that involvement is different from employment. NIHR provides a template letter on their website. Public members getting involved in NIHR-funded research projects can also access the free, confidential, and personalised Benefits Advice Service coordinated by the Bedford Citizens Advice Bureau. Information for how to access this service can be found in Section 8 of the NIHR Payment guidance for members of the public considering involvement in research.

For more information, please read the NIHR guidance linked above.