Table 1 Four in-depth impact case studies: summary of key features

BELLS (Dundee) [36]

Randomised controlled trial

Improved cure rate

Commissioned as ‘high clinical priority’ study by Health Technology Assessment Programme

Reduced referral to hospitals

Ex ante and ongoing engagement of clinicians

Widespread involvement of clinical research networks nationally

High-impact publication in international journal

Cot death (Bristol) [37]

Case–control

Reduced mortality

Well-established and mature programme of ‘niche’ research

Ex ante and ongoing engagement of third sector charity

Skilled knowledge translation (working with knowledge translation experts) to disseminate key messages for lay audiences

Commitment of researchers to the ‘moral work’ of linking the contribution of research participants (bereaved parents) and potential beneficiaries (new and prospective parents)

Social inequality (York) [38]

Systematic review of observational studies

Shifting the focus of public debate

Energetic and proactive dissemination campaign run through a newly established charitable trust

Achieving political commitment to addressing the issues

Extensive lobbying of prospective and existing politicians and policymakers

Authors’ input to commissions and working parties

Primary focus on outputs for a lay/civic audience with ‘academic’ outputs as a secondary priority

Production of cultural artefacts

Researcher commitment to ‘moral work’

Lay people in public health (Leeds Beckett) [39]

Co-production, systematic review, service evaluation

Lay health trainer programmes established locally

Local multi-stakeholder partnerships

Online public information resource

Co-production model

Emphasis on ensuring all voices were heard

Ex ante linkage with (and preferred provider status to) national policymakers