Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research has gained prominence, with patients and public actively shaping research priorities, study design and knowledge translation. While the benefits and challenges of PPI are well documented, less attention has been given to the complexity of navigating multiple identities as research team members. Often, patients and public, academics and clinicians share many of the same goals and occupy overlapping roles, yet research structures rarely acknowledge or accommodate this fluidity. This commentary explores how shared identities of patients and public, academics and clinicians shape research partnerships, challenging conventional boundaries by questioning whether patients and public can also serve as academics or clinicians and vice versa.

This commentary is written from an interdisciplinary perspective, where insights are synthesised from existing literature, empirical knowledge and lived experience. The authors critically examine the intersection of patient and public, academic and clinician identities and discuss the implications for research partnerships. Recurring points of tension, including questions about the suitability of partnerships and the complexities of identity, are explored. The discussion considers how members of research teams navigate privilege and shared responsibility within collaborative settings.

Although PPI aims to foster inclusivity, research partnerships often confine patients and public, academics and clinicians to rigid titles, overlooking the multidimensional identities of those involved. To advance research, practice and advocacy, it is foundational to embrace one’s authentic self while recognising the full complexity of team members. Every individual brings a unique perspective and lived experience, and together, a research team shares the collective responsibility to produce rigorous, quality research that strengthens the body of evidence.