By PhD Student Liyuan Zhu
On 17th October 2025, I was very excited to present my research poster at the NIHR SafetyNet Symposium in Manchester. SafetyNet is a group of six NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaborations (PSRCs) across England. This year’s event had a special theme: “Tackling Inequities in Patient Safety.” It was the first time to bring together researchers, doctors, and patient representatives from across the country to share ideas and thoughts.
The symposium included inspiring talks, research showcases, discussions, and poster sessions. I was especially interested in two keynote talks, one about moving away from a “blame culture” in healthcare, and another about ethnic inequalities in patient safety.
I also learned about many areas I had never thought deeply about before, such as healthcare harms in prisons, inequality in perioperative and respiratory care, and access to medicines for people experiencing homelessness.
These sessions made me realise that inequality in health is a very complex issue. It is shaped by factors like race, social background, environment, and language, and also by how society responds to unfairness itself. These issues are linked together, often trapping those already at a disadvantage. To change this, what we can do is to build a strong “safety net” that supports everyone, especially people who are underrepresented or face extra barriers.
My poster was titled “Predicting Diabetic Eye Disease with AI: Trajectory Embedding and Causal Exploration of Statin Effects.” In simple terms, my study looked at how artificial intelligence (AI) can help predict who might develop diabetic eye disease, a leading cause of sight loss in people with diabetes. I also explored whether statins, common cholesterol-lowering medicines, can help reduce this risk. In addition, we found that there are inequalities between males and females, and among diabetes types. These results suggest that healthcare can be more personalised and fairer for each person.
Attending this symposium was a great experience. I met many passionate researchers who share the same goal: to make healthcare safer and more equal. It reminded me that technology like AI should not only make predictions but also help reduce health inequalities and improve care for everyone.
By Kamil, NIHR Newcastle PSRC Patient, Public Contributor
Lured by the promise of good food and new acquaintances, on Friday 17 October I made my way to Manchester for the NIHR SafetyNet Symposium – a gathering of clinicians, researchers and public contributors united by a single mission: tackling inequities in patient safety. Hosted by the Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (PSRC), the event brought together colleagues from the six PSRCs across England – Central London, Greater Manchester, Midlands, Newcastle, North West London and Yorkshire & Humber.
The day began with coffee and a bustling lobby filled with poster presentations. From the start, it was clear this wasn’t just an academic exercise. It was a collective effort to bridge the gap between policy, practice and lived experience.
One of the first things that struck me was the keynote by Dr Rosie Benneyworth from the Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB). I hadn’t heard of HSSIB before and I found its mission fascinating. The organisation investigates systemic issues in healthcare topics such as sepsis, prison health and fatigue without focusing on blame. Instead, it looks for learning and improvement. This shift from a ‘who’s to blame’ culture to one of collective accountability resonated deeply with me.
A presentation on avoidable healthcare-associated harm in prisons was another eye-opener. While I wasn’t surprised to hear that prisoners and people experiencing homelessness suffer significantly worse health outcomes, it was sobering to see how these inequities manifest in daily practice e.g. medication shortages, missed appointments and institutional barriers that make basic care difficult. As someone finishing reading a book on health promotion, I could connect the dots between theory and reality: these are not abstract inequalities, they are lived injustices.
One reflection that stayed with me came from a discussion about adoption and breaking cycles of poverty and violence. Even in systems that often feel broken, there are ways to create safety and opportunity through compassion and action.
Several sessions focused on the intersection of communication and safety, including translation and interpreting services. This hit particularly close to home. As a qualified Polish interpreter, I know how vital accurate translation is for patient safety, yet the pay rates offered by NHS providers are often so low that professionals can’t afford to take the work. Hearing that language access was being discussed as a safety issue, not just a convenience, was both encouraging and frustrating. We have the knowledge; now the system needs the will to act.
The Patient Safety Healthcare Inequalities Reduction Framework, presented by Dr Hester Wain, outlined five principles for change: communication and information, training and resources, data, co-production, and research. I was especially struck by her emphasis that the experiences informing the framework are what make it powerful.
By the end of the day, after many conversations in the poster corridor and a moving talk on ethnic inequities in patient safety by Professor Dawn Edge, I left Manchester feeling both hopeful and challenged. The message was clear: health doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Tackling inequity requires empathy, collaboration, and, above all, a commitment to listen to those whose voices are too often ignored. For me, as a patient-cum-public contributor, the symposium was a reminder that my lived experience isn’t just welcome in research – it’s essential.
By Dr Anna Robinson-Barella and Dr Matt Cooper
Along with several of our NIHR Newcastle PSRC colleagues, Matt and I attended the SafetyNet symposium on Friday 17th October in Manchester. The focus of the event was: “Tackling Inequalities in Patient Safety”. It was a day that encouraged a lot of reflection-primarily upon patient safety and our cross-PSRC SafetyNet-agenda, but also upon intersectional influences including ethnicity, marginalisation, and wider EDI-related issues underpinning our work.
We heard from speakers across all six of the PSRCs, as well as two keynote speakers, Dr Rosie Benneyworth presenting “Moving away from a “whose to blame” culture” and Prof Dawn Edge presenting “Ethnic Inequalities in Patient Safety”.
NIHR Newcastle PSRC had 32 of our colleagues in attendance; many of whom presented research posters about their work covering topics like polypharmacy, medicines adherence, costs and treatment decisions, social prescribing, health-related quality of life, and predicting diseases by using AI.
It was also a pleasure to personally contribute to the agenda of the day, and represent NIHR Newcastle PSRC, by presenting an evidence synthesis on inequities affecting medicines access for people experiencing homelessness and the subsequent consequences on their (patient) safety.
Congratulations to all the team involved in organising, hosting and running a great symposium!
By Anonymous Public Contributor
I am a public contributor who has been involved for about six years with many interesting research projects.
I volunteered to give my views to researchers, as, at the age of 75, I have experienced many problems relating to health and social issues. I am retired and have more time, which enables me to participate as a public contributor both online and at in-person meetings.
As both a person who suffers from multiple health conditions and a carer for two people who have complicated health problems, I have been able to contribute my opinions and views on different subjects. I hope my contribution has been helpful in shaping the research studies by responding to the questions posed by the researchers.
I think that public involvement is very important in order to give as wide a view as possible in research studies. Opinions from patients and carers from different ethnic, class, disability and cultural backgrounds may raise issues which researchers need to take into account.
For example, having a family member with liver problems, I was able to contribute to research which highlighted the prejudice the public has about liver transplants where the patient has a problem with alcohol. The researcher designed the study so that information which may have been difficult to include was obtained discreetly, as many patients and carers sometimes try to hide the problem.
By including relevant public contributors’ views and stories, such things as living with a colostomy bag or problems experienced with toileting situations are brought to the attention of researchers.
I am pleased that being involved as a public contributor has improved my IT skills and given me more confidence to speak at meetings.
I have seen researchers suddenly become aware at meetings, on hearing answers to their questions of areas of research which they had not previously thought about.
Call to action.
“Make your research results relevant to all by using PPI.”
Making research truly inclusive, equitable, and impactful.
The Culturally Competent Research Framework (CCRF) is a practical toolkit that helps researchers embed cultural competence and equity into every stage of the research journey — from idea to impact.
Developed through an NIHR-funded collaboration, the framework brings together a multi-disciplinary team of academics, community leaders, policy makers, translators, and interpreters. Together, they co-designed an evidence-based, step-by-step guide to make culturally competent research not just an aspiration, but a standard.
Grounded in Meleis’ cultural competence principles — and expanded to include language, cultural humility, reflexivity, and reciprocity — the CCRF offers 25 actionable recommendations and measures you can apply across five key research stages:
1. Formulation | 2. Recruitment | 3. Measurement | 4. Analysis | 5. Dissemination
This isn’t another checklist. It’s a living framework that helps you design and deliver research that truly represents, respects, and benefits diverse communities.
Whether you’re writing a grant, planning a study, reviewing ethics, or sharing findings, the CCRF gives you the tools to make your research more inclusive, credible, and culturally responsive.
Start here. Start now. Make cultural competence the norm — not the exception.
By Safer Integrated Health and Social Care Environments PhD Student, Lauren Lawson
In August I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to travel to Singapore to attend the BMJ International Forum on Quality and Safety in Healthcare. I presented a poster about a service evaluation I had worked on, led by Dr Matt Cooper, which explored a hospital discharge service providing one-to-one, personalised support for carers of people leaving hospital.
The conference theme, moving together toward sustainable quality, emphasised the importance of collaboration across sectors to achieve lasting improvements in healthcare. Many sessions focused on involving patients and carers as partners in care, by embedding lived experience into service design and evaluation to make change meaningful and sustainable. Other sessions explored how to support population health across the life course, recognising the social factors that shape health and the role of community-based care.
“For me, a key message was that sustainability in healthcare also depends on continuity, where good care extends beyond the hospital to meet people’s needs in the community.”
These messages echoed the key findings from our service evaluation, which highlighted how person-centred, inclusive support can empower carers to support their own wellbeing and the patient during hospital-to-home transitions. Our approach of working with staff and carers to understand the service’s impact reflected the same emphasis on participation and learning that was central to the conference. For me, a key message was that sustainability in healthcare also depends on continuity, where good care extends beyond the hospital to meet people’s needs in the community.
After the conference I got to explore Singapore and think about sustainability in a different way. The contrast between greenery and skyscrapers, the hawker centres blending food from diverse communities together, and the evening light show through the Supertrees were all incredible reminders the benefits of collaborative design.
by Hiranmayi Madabhushi Hari, Research Assistant, working with Dr Anna Robinson-Barella and Prof Andy Husband.
Hiranmayi Madabhushi Hari, one of our Research Assistants working with Dr Anna Robinson-Barella and Prof Andy Husband, recently attended training about D/deaf awareness. In this reflective blog, Hiranmayi shares a call to action for inclusive research approaches for people who are Deaf and/or Hard of Hearing.
Behind every statistic on deafness (1,2) lies a painful truth: people who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing (HoH) continue to be sidelined in healthcare, research, and everyday life. Deafness is a hidden disability, one you cannot always “see”, yet misconceptions endure. Too often, society clings to inappropriate labels like “deaf & mute/dumb” or “hearing impaired”, “handicapped” terms rooted in stigma. The distinctions between Deaf, deaf, Hard of hearing and Deafblind remain poorly understood, while assumptions that cochlear implants or hearing aids “fix” hearing only deepen isoloaton.
Language matters. Labels must respect individual identity, not reinforce exclusion and a lack of awareness can have very real consequences. Many people cannot lipread, nor do they necessarily know British Sign Language (BSL). Without interpreters, functional hearing loops, or accessible systems, they are left excluded from basic services, including healthcare. For many BSL users and D/deaf people, poor mental health outcomes are a direct consequence of systemic barriers, worsened when communication needs are ignored, interpreters are absent, and accessible systems simply don’t exist. The recent Still Ignores: The fight for Accessible Healthcare report (3) describes this neglect as a “damning indictment”: Deaf patients left without understanding diagnoses, unable to contact their GP, and excluded from safe, equitable care.
These failures spill into research, where D/deaf people are often excluded from clinical trials or overlooked in inclusion criteria. D/deaf awareness, culture, and communication must be embedded in both research design and service delivery. As researchers, we must ask ourselves: are our services and research strategies truly accessible? Do we respect preferred communications? Do we prioritise D/deaf culture in research? Change requires not pity but patience, awareness and urgent action.
References:
- Prevalence of British Sign Language [Internet]. RNID. [cited 2025 Sep 17]. Available from: https://rnid.org.uk/get-involved/research-and-policy/facts-and-figures/prevalence-of-british-sign-language/
- GOV.UK [Internet]. [cited 2025 Sep 17]. The British Sign Language (BSL) report 2022. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2022/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2022
- Still ignored: the fight for accessible healthcare. Available from: https://rnid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Still-ignored-the-fight-for-accessible-healthcare.pdf
By Safer Integrated Health and Social Care Environments theme Research Assistant, Evgenia Stepanova.
The PreSIDInt study research team recently presented at The Future Is Cultural: Policy, Practice, and Education Congress, held at the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya in Barcelona (15–17 September 2025). Read more about the event here. The conference was well attended, bringing together an international mix of academics, policymakers, practitioners, artists, and community representatives.
Our paper, “Culturally Competent Strategy to Research: Recommendations and Measures to Design, Deliver and Disseminate a Research Study,” was presented in the Audience Analysis and Cultural Participation session, alongside several thought-provoking contributions. These included presentations on festival resilience (Piotr Firych, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland), festivalization and its links to social change and democracy (Emmanuel Negrier, University of Montpellier, France), students’ cultural practices and emotions (Marine Thebault, Université Côte d’Azur, France), and participatory evaluation within the Stronger Peripheries Project (Elisabete Tomaz, ISCTE, Portugal).
Whilst other presenters examined how culture is embedded in communities and its role in shaping social change, democracy, and territorial identity, our work focused on how culture and cultural identity can be explored within the research process itself. This generated strong interest, with attendees taking photos of the findings and engaging in lively discussion around our interactive online tool. Leaflets featuring artwork illustrating the project’s key findings were also distributed and well received, with many participants taking them on board. These exchanges provided valuable feedback, informed next steps, and strengthened the project’s international visibility as we continue developing the framework into an accessible online resource.
Research Assistant, Amaani Huassain
I was pleased to be invited to speak at this year’s International Psoriasis Council Symposium, held during the 54th European Society for Dermatological Research (ESDR) meeting in Antwerp, Belgium. It was an amazing opportunity to share an update on my PhD research, which looks at how artificial intelligence (AI) can improve treatment selection in psoriasis.
Psoriasis is a long-term skin condition that causes red, scaly areas. There are now many effective treatments called biologic therapies, which work by targeting parts of the immune system involved in psoriasis. Despite these options, it can be hard to know which biologic will work best for each individual. Right now, dermatologists often go through a long and costly process of trial-and-error to find the most appropriate treatment. My research is trying to change that by developing an AI tool that can help dermatologists choose the safest and most effective biologic for each patient.
My presentation sparked some insightful conversations, and these continued during the conference’s social events and later at a poster walk where I presented more of my work.
The meeting took place in a very unusual and memorable venue: the Flanders Meeting & Convention Center, which is part of Antwerp Zoo! This venue was complete with dramatic exhibits such as a suspended whale skeleton and a stunning butterfly room.
Over the four days, I listened to inspiring talks from both leading scientists and early-career researchers. It was fantastic to discuss ideas and return with fresh thoughts to shape the next phase of my work. One of the most powerful moments for me was a panel discussion led by women scientists who spoke openly about the challenges and benefits of working in research as a woman.
I had never really thought of visiting Antwerp before, but after seeing its beautiful buildings, fascinating culture, and endless chocolate shops, I’d recommend a visit!
Reflections on the Psoriasis Association Annual Meeting, June 2025, London by Research Assistant, Shaurya Pal
Walking into County Hall, London, on 28th June 2025, I could feel the excitement in the air. Doctors, researchers, and patients had gathered for the Right Treatment: Right Time Annual Psoriasis Meeting, all sharing knowledge about psoriasis—a skin condition that causes red, itchy patches. The main theme of the day stayed with me: giving patients the right treatment at the right time is key to keeping them safe and healthy.
The first talk by Professor Darren Ashcroft really caught my attention. He explained that factors like smoking, alcohol, and being overweight can make psoriasis worse. He also highlighted that other health conditions, such as cancer and cardiovascular disease, can influence psoriasis too. For me, this was a big reminder that treatment isn’t just about the skin—it’s about the whole patient. Understanding these links helps researchers and doctors make better choices to keep patients safe.
Next, Dr. Andrew Pink spoke about new treatments and their safety. He explained that biologics, like Icotrokinra (IL-23), and the topical Topinarof, are very well tolerated, while Spesolimab shows good results for a serious type of psoriasis. He reminded everyone that most patients have mild to moderate psoriasis, so treatments must be carefully matched to the right severity at the right time. It was inspiring to see how researchers make patient safety their top priority.
There were also talks by Dr. Thivi Maruthappu on diet and nutrition, and Dr. John Lee, who shared insights from MySkin.org, where patients contribute their experiences. These sessions showed me how listening to patients helps doctors provide the right treatment at the right time—not too early, not too late, and always safely.
In the afternoon, Professor Catherine Smith spoke about how psoriasis and heart disease share the same biological pathways, and Luc Francis, a young researcher, presented his work on biomarkers of remission. Both talks made it clear that timely treatment can prevent long-term health problems.
The day ended with patient panels and expert discussions, emphasizing that patients and researchers working together is essential to improve care.
For me, the conference was more than just learning about new medicines—it was a reminder that every decision in research and treatment should prioritize patient safety. I left inspired to continue my work, making sure that the right treatment is given at the right time, for the benefit of patients everywhere.
