Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research

Tracey Williamson, Laurence P J Kenney, Anthony T. Barker, Glen Cooper, Tim Good, Jamie Healey, Ben W. Heller, David Howard, Martin Matthews, Sarah Prenton, Julia Ryan, Christine Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To appraise the application of accepted good practice guidance on public involvement in assistive technology research and to identify its impact on the research team, the public, device and trial design. Methods: Critical reflection and within-project evaluation were undertaken in a case study of the development of a functional electrical stimulation device. Individual and group interviews were undertaken with lay members of a 10 strong study user advisory group and also research team members. Results: Public involvement was seen positively by research team members, who reported a positive impact on device and study designs. The public identified positive impact on confidence, skills, self-esteem, enjoyment, contribution to improving the care of others and opportunities for further involvement in research. A negative impact concerned the challenge of engaging the public in dissemination after the study end. Conclusions: The public were able to impact significantly on the design of an assistive technology device which was made more fit for purpose. Research team attitudes to public involvement were more positive after having witnessed its potential first hand. Within-project evaluation underpins this case study which presents a much needed detailed account of public involvement in assistive technology design research to add to the existing weak evidence base.Implications for RehabilitationThe evidence base for impact of public involvement in rehabilitation technology design is in need of development.Public involvement in co-design of rehabilitation devices can lead to technologies that are fit for purpose.Rehabilitation researchers need to consider the merits of active public involvement in research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)258-265
Number of pages8
JournalDisability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology
Volume10
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2015

Fingerprint

Self-Help Devices
Research Design
Equipment Design
Research
Patient rehabilitation
Rehabilitation
Technology
Self Concept
Electric Stimulation
Research Personnel
Interviews
Equipment and Supplies

Cite this

Williamson, T., Kenney, L. P. J., Barker, A. T., Cooper, G., Good, T., Healey, J., ... Smith, C. (2015). Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 10(3), 258-265. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2014.908247
Williamson, Tracey ; Kenney, Laurence P J ; Barker, Anthony T. ; Cooper, Glen ; Good, Tim ; Healey, Jamie ; Heller, Ben W. ; Howard, David ; Matthews, Martin ; Prenton, Sarah ; Ryan, Julia ; Smith, Christine. / Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research. In: Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology. 2015 ; Vol. 10, No. 3. pp. 258-265.
@article{98794cd90c2f4ea9b76163a9c47760f5,
title = "Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research",
abstract = "Purpose: To appraise the application of accepted good practice guidance on public involvement in assistive technology research and to identify its impact on the research team, the public, device and trial design. Methods: Critical reflection and within-project evaluation were undertaken in a case study of the development of a functional electrical stimulation device. Individual and group interviews were undertaken with lay members of a 10 strong study user advisory group and also research team members. Results: Public involvement was seen positively by research team members, who reported a positive impact on device and study designs. The public identified positive impact on confidence, skills, self-esteem, enjoyment, contribution to improving the care of others and opportunities for further involvement in research. A negative impact concerned the challenge of engaging the public in dissemination after the study end. Conclusions: The public were able to impact significantly on the design of an assistive technology device which was made more fit for purpose. Research team attitudes to public involvement were more positive after having witnessed its potential first hand. Within-project evaluation underpins this case study which presents a much needed detailed account of public involvement in assistive technology design research to add to the existing weak evidence base.Implications for RehabilitationThe evidence base for impact of public involvement in rehabilitation technology design is in need of development.Public involvement in co-design of rehabilitation devices can lead to technologies that are fit for purpose.Rehabilitation researchers need to consider the merits of active public involvement in research.",
keywords = "Assistive technology, Co-design, Evaluation, Public involvement",
author = "Tracey Williamson and Kenney, {Laurence P J} and Barker, {Anthony T.} and Glen Cooper and Tim Good and Jamie Healey and Heller, {Ben W.} and David Howard and Martin Matthews and Sarah Prenton and Julia Ryan and Christine Smith",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3109/17483107.2014.908247",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "258--265",
journal = "Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology",
issn = "1748-3115",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

Williamson, T, Kenney, LPJ, Barker, AT, Cooper, G, Good, T, Healey, J, Heller, BW, Howard, D, Matthews, M, Prenton, S, Ryan, J & Smith, C 2015, 'Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research', Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 258-265. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2014.908247

Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research. / Williamson, Tracey; Kenney, Laurence P J; Barker, Anthony T.; Cooper, Glen; Good, Tim; Healey, Jamie; Heller, Ben W.; Howard, David; Matthews, Martin; Prenton, Sarah; Ryan, Julia; Smith, Christine.

In: Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, Vol. 10, No. 3, 01.05.2015, p. 258-265.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Enhancing public involvement in assistive technology design research

AU - Williamson, Tracey

AU - Kenney, Laurence P J

AU - Barker, Anthony T.

AU - Cooper, Glen

AU - Good, Tim

AU - Healey, Jamie

AU - Heller, Ben W.

AU - Howard, David

AU - Matthews, Martin

AU - Prenton, Sarah

AU - Ryan, Julia

AU - Smith, Christine

PY - 2015/5/1

Y1 - 2015/5/1

N2 - Purpose: To appraise the application of accepted good practice guidance on public involvement in assistive technology research and to identify its impact on the research team, the public, device and trial design. Methods: Critical reflection and within-project evaluation were undertaken in a case study of the development of a functional electrical stimulation device. Individual and group interviews were undertaken with lay members of a 10 strong study user advisory group and also research team members. Results: Public involvement was seen positively by research team members, who reported a positive impact on device and study designs. The public identified positive impact on confidence, skills, self-esteem, enjoyment, contribution to improving the care of others and opportunities for further involvement in research. A negative impact concerned the challenge of engaging the public in dissemination after the study end. Conclusions: The public were able to impact significantly on the design of an assistive technology device which was made more fit for purpose. Research team attitudes to public involvement were more positive after having witnessed its potential first hand. Within-project evaluation underpins this case study which presents a much needed detailed account of public involvement in assistive technology design research to add to the existing weak evidence base.Implications for RehabilitationThe evidence base for impact of public involvement in rehabilitation technology design is in need of development.Public involvement in co-design of rehabilitation devices can lead to technologies that are fit for purpose.Rehabilitation researchers need to consider the merits of active public involvement in research.

AB - Purpose: To appraise the application of accepted good practice guidance on public involvement in assistive technology research and to identify its impact on the research team, the public, device and trial design. Methods: Critical reflection and within-project evaluation were undertaken in a case study of the development of a functional electrical stimulation device. Individual and group interviews were undertaken with lay members of a 10 strong study user advisory group and also research team members. Results: Public involvement was seen positively by research team members, who reported a positive impact on device and study designs. The public identified positive impact on confidence, skills, self-esteem, enjoyment, contribution to improving the care of others and opportunities for further involvement in research. A negative impact concerned the challenge of engaging the public in dissemination after the study end. Conclusions: The public were able to impact significantly on the design of an assistive technology device which was made more fit for purpose. Research team attitudes to public involvement were more positive after having witnessed its potential first hand. Within-project evaluation underpins this case study which presents a much needed detailed account of public involvement in assistive technology design research to add to the existing weak evidence base.Implications for RehabilitationThe evidence base for impact of public involvement in rehabilitation technology design is in need of development.Public involvement in co-design of rehabilitation devices can lead to technologies that are fit for purpose.Rehabilitation researchers need to consider the merits of active public involvement in research.

KW - Assistive technology

KW - Co-design

KW - Evaluation

KW - Public involvement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925129957&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3109/17483107.2014.908247

DO - 10.3109/17483107.2014.908247

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 258

EP - 265

JO - Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

JF - Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

SN - 1748-3115

IS - 3

ER -