Supporting meaningful public involvement and engagement in health research: a call for feedback on unsuccessful grant proposals

Funders increasingly emphasise patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) as an integral component of health and biomedical research. This shift reflects broader commitments to inclusivity, transparency and accountability, recognising that lived experiences enhance the relevance, feasibility and impact of research. PPIE can improve study design, recruitment and dissemination, supporting a transition from expert-led to co-created knowledge generation. However, funders sometimes provide little or no feedback on unsuccessful grant applications, typically citing capacity constraints. While some organisations offer constructive critique, others-especially smaller funders-do not, undermining the very participatory principles they aim to promote. Lack of feedback hampers researchers' professional development and disproportionately affects early-career academics, underrepresented groups and those without strong institutional support. It also risks discouraging public contributors who invest time and emotional effort in co-developing proposals, eroding trust and diminishing willingness to engage in the future. This disconnect between expectation and communication reinforces systemic inequities and risks reducing PPIE to a symbolic gesture. Strengthening response mechanisms is both a practical necessity and a moral and ethical obligation. Constructive critique is central to scientific progress; without it, the promise of PPIE to foster a reciprocal and transformative partnership risks being undermined, at a time when public trust in science is already fragile. We believe that current funding systems need to acknowledge their responsibility to deliver meaningful feedback, even within the realities of constrained resources.