PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY Public involvement is required for applied health research funded in the UK. One of the largest funders, the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR), makes it clear that it values the knowledge of patients and the public. As a result, there are now many resources to make sure that the public voice is included in decision-making about research. However, there is concern that the public voice still has limited impact on research decision-making. This article asks to what extent has power shifted from the scientific research community to the public? It looks at how much power and impact patients and members of the public have about research by asking: How do the public contribute to deciding which research areas and which research projects should be funded? How do they influence how the research is carried out? The article argues that there is evidence that the public voice is present in research decision-making. However, there is less evidence of a change in the power dynamic between the scientific research community and the public. The public involved in research are not always equal partners. The scientific research community still has the loudest voice and patients and the public do not always feel sufficiently empowered to challenge it. ABSTRACT Public involvement in applied health research is a pre-requisite for funding from many funding bodies. In particular the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) in the UK, clearly states that it values lay knowledge and there is an expectation that members of the public will participate as research partners in research. As a result a large public involvement infrastructure has emerged to facilitate this. However, there is concern that despite the flurry of activity in promoting public involvement, lay knowledge is marginalised and has limited impact on research decision-making. This article asks to what extent has power shifted from the scientific research community to the public? It discusses the meaning of power and models of public involvement and examines the development of public involvement in applied health research. It identifies public involvement in a range of decision-making: identifying priority areas for commissioning research; making decisions about which projects are funded; decisions about details of research design. Whilst there is evidence that the public voice is present in the composition of research proposals submitted to NIHR and in the decision-making about which projects are funded and how they are carried out, there is less evidence of a change in the power dynamic manifest in social relations between the scientific research community and the public. As a result the biomedical model remains dominant and largely unchallenged in research decision-making.

中文翻译：

---

人民的力量：公众参与应用健康研究在多大程度上实现了这一目标？

简明英语摘要 在英国资助的应用健康研究需要公众参与。最大的资助者之一，美国国立卫生研究院 (NIHR)，明确表示它重视患者和公众的知识。因此，现在有很多资源可以确保公众的声音被纳入研究决策。然而，人们担心公众的声音对研究决策的影响仍然有限。这篇文章问，权力从科研界转移到公众的程度有多大？它通过询问以下问题来考察患者和公众对研究的影响力和影响力：公众如何决定应该资助哪些研究领域和哪些研究项目？它们如何影响研究的进行？文章认为，有证据表明公众的声音存在于研究决策中。然而，很少有证据表明科学研究界和公众之间的权力动态发生了变化。参与研究的公众并不总是平等的合作伙伴。科学研究界的声音仍然最大，患者和公众并不总是觉得有足够的能力去挑战它。摘要 公众参与应用健康研究是获得许多资助机构资助的先决条件。特别是英国国立卫生研究院 (NIHR)，明确表示它重视非专业知识，并期望公众作为研究伙伴参与研究。因此，出现了一个大型的公共参与基础设施来促进这一点。然而，令人担忧的是，尽管在促进公众参与方面开展了一系列活动，但非专业知识仍被边缘化，对研究决策的影响有限。这篇文章问，权力从科研界转移到公众的程度有多大？它讨论了权力的含义和公众参与的模式，并考察了公众参与应用健康研究的发展。它确定公众参与一系列决策：确定委托研究的优先领域；决定资助哪些项目；关于研究设计细节的决定。虽然有证据表明公众的声音存在于提交给 NIHR 的研究提案的组成中，以及关于哪些项目得到资助以及如何进行的决策中，但很少有证据表明在科研界与公众之间的社会关系。因此，生物医学模型仍然占主导地位，并且在研究决策中基本上没有受到挑战。很少有证据表明科学研究界与公众之间的社会关系中表现出的权力动态发生了变化。因此，生物医学模型仍然占主导地位，并且在研究决策中基本上没有受到挑战。很少有证据表明科学研究界与公众之间的社会关系中表现出的权力动态发生了变化。因此，生物医学模型仍然占主导地位，并且在研究决策中基本上没有受到挑战。