Domestic Abuse Survivors’ perceptions of public good and Harm in the use of administrative datasets for Public Health Research (DASH)

Background ‘Public good’ is used as a rationale for accessing data for research. [1] Past research and dialogues have found there is public support for accessing data for research, providing that it maximises benefits to society and minimises potential harm. [2] However, not enough is known about the perceptions of people represented in datasets used for research on sensitive topics such as domestic violence and abuse (DVA). These individuals often stand to be most affected, positively or negatively, by the outcomes of research. [3] DVA has a significant negative impact on the health and wellbeing of many people, particularly those who are already marginalised in society. [4] Data-led research has potential to shape services to better support these groups, but such research must be carried out in an environment of trust. Research Question How can planning and communication of research using data about DVA consider survivors’ perspectives of ‘good’ and harmful’ outcomes in ways that promote trust? Aims and Objectives This research aims to add actionable new knowledge of value to public health researchers on the acceptability of the use of administrative data for public health research, by investigating ‘good’ or ‘harmful’ outcomes in a specific research area. This will be conducted in the context of DVA through the following objectives: Collaborate with charity partners to recruit and induct a ‘Research Advocates Group’ - a diverse group of six individuals with lived experience of DVA - and co-design work package 2 (WP2). This will occur in WP1 (Oct 25 - Jan 26). Collaborate with Advocates and charity partners to co-deliver a series of workshops with different groups of participants who have lived experience of DVA which explore the research question (WP2: Feb 26 - Jul 26). Analyse qualitative data collected from workshops to examine factors associated with perspectives of ‘good’ and ‘harm’ in data-led research. This will be accomplished in WP3 (Apr 26 - Sept 26), with input from the Advocates to interpret and validate findings. Work with Advocates to co-produce materials which relate survivors’ perspectives on ‘good’ and harm’ in data-led research about DVA, and gives guidance on considering people with lived experience in planning and delivering research, and on communicating about it in a proactive, transparent, and accessible way (WP4: Oct 26 - Mar 27). Methods Following established frameworks, we will adopt a co-production approach throughout the project with the Research Advocates Group, to co-design workshops in WP1, co-facilitate them in WP2, validate the findings in WP3, and co-produce guidance for dissemination in WP4. [5] Maximum variation will be utilised in recruiting participants for WP2 and thematic analysis will be employed to analyse the qualitative data generated. [6] This approach offers a rigorous and flexible framework that can help extract meaningful insights, ensuring analysis is rooted in the lived experience of participants. Anticipated impact and dissemination The findings of this research will be communicated to academic, public and policy audiences in a strategy co-designed with the Advocates using Sheeran’s ‘7Cs of Impact’ as a framework. [7] It is anticipated that the findings will contribute to knowledge of public acceptability of the use of data. This will contribute to practices in research which are more inclusive and trusted, leading to greater support for accessing data for research.