Skip to main content

Table 2 Participant and community representatives

From: “PROUD to have been involved”: an evaluation of participant and community involvement in the PROUD HIV prevention trial

 ParticipantsCommunity representatives
Number involved in PPI8811
Number responded46 (52%)8 (73%)
Agea
 18–293 (7%)0 (0%)
 30–3913 (30%)1 (13%)
 40–4916 (36%)4 (50%)
 50–596 (14%)2 (25%)
 60 & over6 (14%)1 (13%)
Are you based in London (within the M25)?
 Yes28 (61%)6 (75%)
 No18 (39%)2 (25%)
Type of activity involved ina
 Membership of Advisory Group3 (7%)8 (100%)
 Participant involvement meetings32 (70%)2 (25%)
 Communicating results16 (35%)6 (75%)
 Email review of documents or findings18 (39%)4 (50%)
 Extended Community Engagement Group with media organisations2 (4%)4 (50%)
Ever been involved in similar processes before4 (9%)4 (50%)
Do you think your involvement made a difference to the study?
 Yes34 (74%)8 (100%)
 No12 (26%)0 (0%)
Did your involvement have an impact on your as an individual?
 Yes33 (72%)5 (63%)
 No13 (28%)3 (38%)
If you represented a community organisation in the PROUD study, did your involvement have an impact on the organisation you represented?
 YesN/A8 (100%)
 No 0 (0%)
Would you have liked to be more involved?
 Yes20 (43%)3 (38%)
 No24 (52%)5 (63%)
In future HIV prevention trials, is there anything we should do differently when we involve people?
 Yes18 (39%)3 (38%)
 No28 (61%)5 (63%)
Would you recommend being actively involved in such activities to others?
 Yes34 (85%)8 (100%)
 No3 (8%)0 (0%)
 It depends3 (8%)0 (0%)
  1. aNB. Adds up to more than 100% as people could be involved in more than one activity type