Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies

From: Co-production practice and future research priorities in United Kingdom-funded applied health research: a scoping review

Author (year) Lead organization/location Aim Study design/stakeholder type Intervention reported Health specialty Outcomes of interest Type of co-production used/methods Co-production features/principlesa Reports research or methodology gaps Reports policy/practice implications Funder or source of funding
(i) Co-produced complex interventions (N = 19)
 Intervention development or evaluation (n = 10)
  Brookes [23] NHS Trusts
Birmingham
Nottingham
To develop a reflective learning framework and toolkit for healthcare staff to improve patient, family and staff experience Observational/mixed-method
Clinical and managerial staff, patients and relatives from acute medical units
Patient experience and reflective learning (PEARL) toolkit—locally adaptable workplace-based toolkit with guidance on using reflective learning to incorporate patient and staff experience in routine clinical activities Acute and intensive care Impact
Barriers and facilitators of reflective behaviours Observations of capability, opportunity & motivation of staff
Output
reflective learning toolkit
Co-design
Meetings and workshops with all participants
Reflection and discussion
Sharing of power
Joint decision-making
Involvement at all project stages
  * NIHR
  Buckley 2019 [24] University
NW England
To explore the preliminary effects and acceptability of a co-produced physical activity referral intervention Evaluation Physical activity referral intervention designed to support participants in making gradual and sustainable changes to their physical activity levels Public health/health promotion Health
Physical activity, cardiometabolic and anthropometric measures
Impact
Perception of the intervention vs usual care
Co-design NR *   PhD studentship
  Buckley 2018 [25] University
NW England
To report process data from the participatory co-development phase of an exercise referral scheme (ERS) in a large city in NW England Qualitative/participatory research
Multilevel: commissioners, general practitioners (GPs), health trainers, exercise referral practitioners, academics
Physical activity referral intervention designed to support participants in making gradual and sustainable changes to their physical activity levels Public health/health promotion Impact
Challenges of co-production
Output
Factors to consider when translating evidence into practice in an exercise referral setting
Service co-production
Development group meetings
Small group collaborative activities
Sharing of power
Respecting & valuing all contributions
Ongoing dialogue
Continuous reflection
* * PhD studentship
  Clayson 2018 [26] Community research organization
Liverpool
To create a working aide-mémoire, using accessible language, for the process of co-production research between academia and marginalized and stigmatized groups (e.g. people with lived experience of substance use recovery) Qualitative/ethnographic reflection
Academic and community researchers
Checklist to guide co-production Addiction/substance use Methodological
Problems and factors to ensure adherence to co-production principles
Co-production
Video diaries
Blogs
Recorded interviews
Critical reflection
Knowledge exchange
Asset-sharing
Respecting & valuing all contributions
Joint decision-making
Continuous reflection
Involvement at all project stages
* * NR
  Davies 2019 [27] University
London
To report the development and components of a prototype website to support family caregivers of a person with dementia towards the end of life Observational/mixed-method
Academics, health workers, carers, charity members with expertise in dementia
Prototype website aimed at supporting family caregivers of someone with dementia towards the end of life in the United Kingdom Older people/dementia Output
Targets and components of the website
Co-production
Research development group meetings
User testing in individual interviews
Involvement at all project stages
Including all perspectives
  * NIHR
  Evans 2019 [25] University
Swansea
To report the method used by a group of patient and carer service users to develop and implement a model for involving public members in research Observational/mixed-method
Patients with chronic long-term condition and carers
Service Users with Chronic Conditions Encouraging Sensible Solutions (SUCCESS) model for co-production that involves service users from the start Chronic illness Methodological
Process of co-production
Output
Principles for involving service users
Co-production
One workshop with group work
Including all perspectives
Establishing ground rules
Involving public members in research
* * NIHR
  Farr 2018 [28] University
Bristol
To examine patient and staff views, experiences and acceptability of a United Kingdom primary care online consultation system Evaluation/mixed-method
GPs, practice nurses, practice managers, administrators, patients
eConsult online consultation system for primary care Primary care Impact
Patient interaction with and use of eConsult; staff satisfaction; practice efficiency
Health
Consultation type and outcome
Service co-production
Used as a theoretical framework for analysis of interviews
NR * * NIHR
  Gradinger 2019 [29] University
NHS Trust
Devon
To report on the impact of two researchers in residence (RiR) working on care model innovations in an integrated care provider organization, as perceived by stakeholders Case study/mixed-method
RiR, academics, quality improvement lead, managers, clinicians
Two new care models: (1) Enhanced Intermediate Care Service and (2) co-located holistic link-worker Wellbeing Coordinators Programme Social care Impact
Stakeholder perceptions of impact; attributes and behaviours for effective interaction
Co-production using embedded researchers
Collaborative working
Ongoing dialogue
Building and maintaining relationships
* * Torbay Medical Research Fund Torbay & an NHS Foundation Trust
supported by NIHR
  Henshall 2018 [30] University
West Midlands
To improve quality and content of midwives’ discussions with low-risk women on place of birth Observational/mixed-method
Academics, midwives, women’s representatives
Place of birth intervention package Maternal health Impact
Midwives’ use and impact of package; knowledge and confidence in providing information to women
Co-design
Feedback visits to midwives (led by academics)
Workshops with midwives and women’s reps (separately then together)
Including all perspectives * * NIHR
  Hubbard 2020 [31] University
Scottish Highlands
To quickly develop an intervention to support people with severe mental ill health, that is systematic, and based on theory and evidence Observational/mixed-method
Academics, health practitioners, charity representatives
“Nature Walks for Wellbeing”
Recently discharged mental health patients are supported to go on nature walks to support their long-term recovery
Mental health Output
Nature Walks for Wellbeing, a 60-min walk in a group
Booklet outlining the importance of outdoor activity
Text message once/week for the first 12 weeks post-discharge to support patients
Co-production
Meetings between academics and stakeholders
Including all perspectives
Joint decision-making
Respecting & valuing all contributions
* * Supported by NIHR
 Systematic or evidence reviews or overviews (n = 3)
  Lim 2020 [32] University
Global
To describe the process and outcomes of services or products co-produced with patients in hospital settings Rapid evidence review NA Health services research Impact
Co-production strategies and types
Outcomes associated with co-produced interventions
Methodological limitations within the co-production process
Co-production (various) NA * * National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship
  O’Cathain 2019 [33] University
England
To review approaches to intervention development to identify the range of approaches available in order to help researchers to develop complex interventions Systematic methods overview NA Health services research Output
Creation of a taxonomy/guide for intervention development approaches
Partnership approaches (incl co-production, co-creation, EBCD) NA *   Medical Research Council
  Smith 2018 [34] University
United Kingdom
To produce an updated synthesis of the co-creation and co-production evidence base in the United Kingdom by identifying empirical evaluations of policies, programmes, interventions and services which incorporated principles of co-creation and co-production Rapid evidence review NA Health services research Methodological
Definitions, objectives and methods used to evaluate co-created and co-produced policies, programmes and interventions
Co-production
Co-creation
NA *   NR
 Critical reflections or opinion (n = 6)
  Locock 2019 [35] University
England
To examine the boundaries and commonalities between co-design approaches to incorporating user perspectives (in the context of designing biomedical research interventions) Opinion NA Biomedical research Conceptual
Identifying overlap between methods/concepts
Ethical/conceptual underpinnings
Co-production Co-design NA * * National Science Foundation
  Madden 2020 [36] University
York
To explore how PPI and co-production were interpreted and applied in the development of a complex intervention on alcohol and medicine use in community pharmacies Critical reflection
Pharmacists, patients, carers, PPI group, professional practice group, policy advisory group
Community pharmacy: Highlighting Alcohol use in Medication appointments (CHAMP)-1 programme Pharmacy Methodological
Barriers/levers to co-producing an intervention in a NIHR research programme
Co-production
Workshops with pharmacists and patients
Consultation with PPI and professional practice groups
Patient perspective
Skills & personal development
Ongoing dialogue
Involvement at all project stages
* * NIHR
  Ramaswarmy 2020 [37] University
United Kingdom/global
To describe how concepts drawn from the field of implementation science can be used to improve the consistency and quality of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) implementation Critical reflection NA Surgery Conceptual
Overview of EBCD concepts in the implementation of ERAS service development
EBCD
Patient as co-creator of design process and services
NR *   NRb
  Raynor 2020 [38] University
Leeds
Bradford
To examine the feasibility and acceptability of health service researchers co-leading EBCD in multiple healthcare settings as part of intervention development Critical reflection
Patients, family/carers, health processionals
“Improving the Safety and Continuity of Medicines management at Transitions of care” (ISCOMAT) was used as a case study Health services research Methodological
Feasibility, acceptability and barriers to intervention development using EBCD
EBCD
Interviews
Patient & staff feedback events
Joint feedback event
Co-design group meetings
Including all perspectives
Involvement at all project stages
Respecting & valuing all contributions
*   NIHR
  Rousseau 2019 [39] University
United Kingdom
To describe and understand the views and experiences of developers and stakeholders about how design occurs in health intervention development Qualitative reflection NA Health services research Methodological
How design occurs in complex health intervention development
Co-design NA *   Medical Research Council
  Young 2019 [40] University
NHS Trusts
Leicester
Lancashire
To describe the process used to co-produce progression criteria for a feasibility study of a complex health intervention Qualitative
Patients, clinicians, academics
NA Health services research Methodological
Outlining method of co-producing “progression criteria” within feasibility studies
Co-production
Individual discussion groups
Mixed discussion groups
(idea generation, voting, ranking, discussion)
Sharing of power
Respecting & valuing all contributions
Including all perspectives
Training and support
  * NIHR
Author (year) Lead organisation /location Aim Study design /stakeholder type Intervention reported Health specialty Outcomes of interest Type of co-production used/methods Co-production features/principles Reports research or methodology gaps Reports policy/practice implications Funder or source of funding
(ii) Co-production in applied health research (N = 64)
 Intervention development or evaluation (n = 34)
  Ali 2018 [41] University
N England
To develop a simple health literacy intervention aimed at supporting informed reproductive choice among members of UK communities practising consanguineous marriage Qualitative
Researchers, product designer, community leaders, religious leaders, lay members, health professionals
Information leaflets/material to enhance health literacy Public health—reproductive health Output
Information leaflets; audio and video clips on a local NHS website link
Co-design
Interviews, focus groups (with vignettes), participatory workshops
Including all perspectives
Respecting & valuing all contributions
Ongoing dialogue
Involvement at all project stages
*   NHS Leeds
NIHR
  Beal 2019 [42] For-profit company
United Kingdom
To share an approach to improve the quality of care and services in a secure mental health setting by valuing the contribution of family and friends Quality improvement
Health workers, family and friends of people with mental ill health
Carer toolkit Mental health Methodological
Ways to carry out co-production with family and friends; lessons learned
Output
Co-produced carer toolkit
Co-production
Workshops
Co-presentation of outputs
Working “with” families and friends *   NR
  Bielinska 2018 [43] University
NHS Trust
London
To co-design an interview topic guide to explore healthcare professionals’ attitudes towards future care planning with older adults in hospital Qualitative
Patients, carers, health professionals
An interview topic guide Older people Methodological
Benefits of multi-professional, patient and carer involvement in co-design
Impact
Understanding of hospital-based anticipatory decision-making
Co-design
Patient and carer panel
NR    NR
  Best 2019 [44] University
Swansea/global
To investigate the use of innovative teaching methods and share a four-step model, to promote the use of co-production in mental health practice Qualitative
Lecturers, undergraduate and postgraduate students in nursing and social work, mental health service users
A four-step model to help develop co-productive teaching methods Mental health Output
A four-step model to help develop co-productive teaching methods which ultimately empower students and service users
Co-production
World café
Building relationships
Respecting & valuing all contributions
Joint decision-making
Sharing of power
* * NR
  Bolton 2020 [45] University
London
To evaluate a community-organized health project by comparing results from two different designs—researcher-controlled and community-controlled Evaluation
Communities, health professionals, academics
Community-organized health project (Parents and Communities Together) Public health/maternal and child Methodological
Challenges of using researcher-controlled designs to evaluate community-led interventions
Differences in results of the two evaluations
Co-production
Social support meetings
Health education workshops
Reciprocity
Building relationships
*   Guy’s & St Thomas’ charity
NIHR
  Chisholm 2018 [46] NHS Trust
London
To explore the processes that facilitated EBCD with carer involvement Case study
Service users, carers, health professionals
Family and carer EBCD project Mental health Impact
Perceptions of the project and participation in it; factors that help and hinder progress; theoretical model of key processes
EBCD
Process-mapping
Videos
Co-design groups using role play
NR * * No funding
  de Andrade 2020 University
Scotland
To explore how asset-based approaches and co-production could be used to engage “hard-to reach” communities Qualitative
Community members, professional stakeholders (government, voluntary & third sector)
Asset-Based Indicator Framework Health research Impact
Developed and critiqued participant-led frameworks for asset-based approaches to address health inequalities; co-production with Black minority ethnic groups
Co-production
Community-based participatory action research
Action-research workshops with professionals and community members & professionals
Video
Reflexive journals
NR * * ESRC (Economic and Social Research Council)
  Dent 2019 [47] NHS Trust
Kent
To examine the value of appreciative inquiry (AI) methodology in enabling co-productive work within mental health service development Case study Appreciative inquiry Mental health services Impact
Description of the use of AI; observations on its use in mental health service improvement
Co-production
The application of AI in co-production
NR * * NR
  Eades 2018 [48] Charity
NHS Mental Health Trust
Berkshire
To quantitatively measure any impact that independent mental health advocacy (IMHA) support had on patients’ self-determination Evaluation
Patient volunteers resident in hospital
An IMHA service Mental health Health
Psychological well-being and self-determination; autonomy, competence and relatedness
Output
Co-produced questionnaire
Co-production
Focus group with patient volunteers
NR    NR
  Farr 2019 [49] University
Bristol
To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of the pilot implementation of a co-designed care pathway tool (CPT) in professionals’ practice to co-produce care plans and enable efficient working Qualitative
Service users, mental health practitioners, service development staff
CPT Mental health Impact
On normalization process theory constructs
Output
an electronic CPT
Co-design
Iterative co-design and testing
Used co-production principles (not elaborated)
Training and support
  * NIHR
Otsuka Health Solutions
  Faulkner 2021 [50] Independent service user
University
London
To inform researchers, practitioners and policy-makers about the value of user leadership in co-productive research with practitioners, particularly for a highly sensitive and potentially distressing topic Observational
Service users, practitioners, academics
User-led study “Keeping Control” Mental health Conceptual
Highlights the importance, achievements and benefits for all people involved in co-producing research
Methodological
Explores the methodological aspects of a user-led study investigating service user experiential knowledge
Co-production
User-led interviews with service users
Focus groups with practitioners
Social media discussion
Stakeholder sense-making event
Shared aims and values
Joint decision-making
Agreed co-production working principles (not elaborated)
  * NIHR
  Gartshore 2018 [51] University
London
To explore the implementation and impact of a service user-led co-design intervention to improve user and staff experience on an adult acute psychiatric inpatient ward Evaluation (mixed-method)
Service users, clinical and managerial ward staff
EBCD quality improvement intervention on a mental health admission ward Mental health Methodological
Awareness of EBCD
Impact
Challenges and benefits of co-design; factors contributing to implementation of EBCD
EBCD
Observations and interviews with staff
Videos of service user narratives
Staff and joint staff & service user feedback events
NR *   NR
  Gault 2019 [52] University
London
To co-produce consensus on the key issues important in educating mental healthcare professionals to optimize mental health medication adherence in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups Qualitative
Service users, carers, student nurses
Educational intervention for mental healthcare professionals Mental health Impact
Users able to challenge original intention of the study
Health
Perceptions of factors enabling or disabling medication adherence
Output
Consensus on content and delivery of an educational intervention for health professionals
Co-production
Interviews with service users & carers
Consensus workshop with users & carers
NR * * Health Innovation Network South London
  Giebel 2019 [53] University
Liverpool
To assess the extent of public involvement, experiences of public advisers and resulting changes in the dissemination of the North-West Coast household survey Qualitative
Public advisors, partner in local authorities and NHS Trusts, academics
Dissemination of a household health survey Health research Methodological
Extent of public involvement; lessons for improving public involvement; experiences of involvement in dissemination of survey findings
Impact
Improved dissemination of survey results
Co-production
Focus group discussion
Co-production workshop with public advisers, partners from local authorities and NHS Trusts, academics
Support
Respecting & valuing all contributions
Transparency
* * NIHR Wellcome Trust
  Girling 2019 [54] University
Newcastle
To explore how young people presenting to youth justice services describe and understand their mental health needs, and to explore how EBCD could be applied to facilitate service developments Qualitative
Service providers, academics
EBCD intervention with young people who offend Mental health Methodological
Challenges in EBCD; effects of including first-hand experiences; shared experiences of challenges among researchers applying EBCD
EBCD
Interviews with staff and academics
NR * * NIHR
  Halsall 2019 [55] NHS Trust
Lancashire
To address the challenges of co-production through use of social media by creating a Facebook forum for discussion and consultation Quality improvement
Service users, health professionals
Closed Facebook forum for members with either lived or professional experience of perinatal mental health issues Mental health Methodological
Perceptions of participation in the forum & how it shaped service developments
Co-design
Facebook forum to discuss service developments
NR    NR
  Horgan 2018 [56] University
Ireland/global
To develop an understanding of the potential contribution to mental health nursing education by those with experience of mental health service use Qualitative Co-produced mental health content for nursing students Mental health Methodological
Views on service user involvement in mental health nursing education; value of lived experience in improving mental health nurses education
Co-production
Focus groups
Involvement at all project stages *   Erasmus+
  Horgan 2020 [57] University
Ireland/global
To develop standards to underpin expert-by-experience involvement in mental health nursing education based on lived experience of service use Qualitative
Service users, nursing academics
Standards for co-producing mental health nursing education Mental health Methodological
Enablers and barriers to involving experts by experience in nursing education; framework to support this involvement
Co-production
Focus groups
Consensus-building discussion
Involvement at all project stages
Joint decision-making
Continuous reflection
  * Erasmus+
  Hannigan 2018 [58] University
Ireland
To use a participatory health research approach to involve communities in examining the implementation of ethnic identifiers in primary care Qualitative
Researchers, community members, decision-makers
Ethnic identifiers in primary care Public health Health
Understanding and addressing inequalities among minority and majority ethnic groups in access to healthcare and health outcomes
Co-construction
Co-creation
Participatory learning and action techniques
Focus groups
Interviews
Involvement at all project stages
Joint decision-making
Sharing of power
   Health Research Board
  Hundt 2019 [59] University
Warwick
To critically analyse the co-production of knowledge on healthcare with members of the public attending two research-based plays that were followed by post-show discussions with expert panellists Evaluation (mixed-method)
Academics, health and social care professionals, service users, theatre directors and writers
Two research-based plays on decision-making towards the end of life (Passing On) and mental health (Cracked) Applied health research Impact
Effect of dialogue between different stakeholders in co-production of knowledge; understanding of the health topics; views on inclusion of service users’ perspectives and experiences; enhanced public engagement
Co-production
Interviews
Developmental drama workshops
Discussion and debate
NR *   University, ESRC, Wellcome
  Leask 2019 [60] University
Glasgow/global
To identify a key set of principles & recommendations for co-creating public health interventions Case study
End users, stakeholders, researchers
To identify a key set of principles and recommendations for co-creating public health interventions Public health Methodological
Development of a framework of principles to facilitate co-creation
Output
Five key principles: framing the aim of the study; sampling; manifesting ownership; defining the procedure; and evaluating (process and intervention)
Co-creation
Action research reflective cycles conducted electronically and face to face
Co-creation principles agreed * * No funding
  Litchfield 2018 [61] University
Birmingham
To use co-design principles to source, implement and evaluate improvements in the blood test and result communication process in United Kingdom primary care Evaluation (mixed-method)
Staff and patients
Interventions to improve the blood testing and result communication process Primary care Methodological
Situational and organizational barriers; participant experiences and influence on service improvement
Co-design
Focus groups with staff and patients mixed
Co-design principles mentioned (not elaborated) * * NIHR
  Lloyd-Williams 2019 [62] University
Liverpool
To evaluate stakeholder involvement in the process of building a decision support tool Observational
NHS commissioners, GPs, local authorities, academics, third-sector and national organizations
NHS Health Check Programme Health services research Impact
Stakeholder views, experiences, expectations
Co-production
Iterative workshops
e-platform
Co-production principles mentioned (not elaborated)    NR
  Luchenski 2019 [63] University
London
To explore involving nonacademic communities in co-developing research priorities, with particular emphasis on traditionally excluded groups Qualitative
People with experience of exclusion, representatives from the NHS, charities, national, regional and local government and academic institutions
An advocacy agenda for Inclusion Health Health inequalities Methodological
Making PPI more inclusive to excluded groups
Co-production
One-day event with inclusive, participatory and consensus-building activities
Co-production approach mentioned (not elaborated) * * University Grand Challenges
  Marent 2018 [64] University
Brighton/global
To use a reflexive approach to evaluate a co-designed mHealth platform for HIV care Evaluation
Clinicians, patients
A digital HIV/AIDS support & self-management platform HIV/AIDS Conceptual
How a reflexive approach can generate understanding & anticipation towards a new intervention
Output
An mHealth platform for health monitoring
Co-design
Peer-led co-design workshops
Interviews
NR * * EU
  Miles 2018 [65] University
London
To discuss how “slow co-production” is an underused but valuable tool for co-production in healthcare design Qualitative
Young people with sickle cell and their carers, healthcare providers
This Sickle Cell Life: co-produced research to improve child-to-adult sickle cell patient care transitions Health services research Methodological
How slow co-production, with content led by priorities of patient, enables deeper insights and better service improvement
Co-production
Repeated interviews & participant diaries with young people
Interviews with healthcare providers
Involvement at all project stages * * NIHR
  O'Connor 2020 [66] University
Edinburgh
To explore the perspectives of stakeholders involved in co-designing a mobile application with people with dementia and their carers Qualitative
People with dementia and their carers, a museum, a software company, and an NHS Trust
App to support communication between carers and people with dementia (Innovate Dementia) Older people Methodological
Experiences of being involved in co-design
Impact
Value of the health app
Health
Health and well-being benefits
Co-design
Living laboratories
Interactive co-design workshops
NR * * Burdett Trust
Pallensen 2020 University
Ireland
To evaluate stakeholder experiences of the co-design process Qualitative
Researchers, healthcare providers, a patient representative
Team-based Collective Leadership and Safety Culture (Co-Lead) programme to improve performance and patient safety Health services research Methodological
Expectations for and experiences of the process; positive aspects and challenges; decision-making process; learning and impact
Co-design
Workshops involving researcher inputs, experience-sharing and co-design
Collective leadership * * Irish Health Research Board
Patel 2018 [67] Public Health England
London
To pilot co-production, delivery and evaluation of oral care training for care home staff Qualitative
Care home managers, residents and family members
Oral health training DVD for care home staff; training resources; oral care support sessions Older people Impact
Oral health knowledge; views on training; areas for improvement
Co-production
Action research
Questionnaire and interview with care home managers
Informal discussions with residents and family
Including all perspectives
Respecting & valuing all contributions
*   NR
  Ponsford 2021 [68] University
London
To describe the approach to co-producing two whole-school sexual health interventions for United Kingdom secondary schools Qualitative
Researchers, secondary school staff and students, youth and policy and practitioner stakeholders in sexual health
Positive Choices aimed at preventing unintended teenage pregnancy
Project Respect aimed at preventing dating and relationship violence and sexual harassment in schools
Adolescent health Output
Two teacher-led, classroom-based sexual health interventions
Methodological
Description of stakeholder consultation to inform intervention development; challenges and dilemmas encountered; extent of co-production
Co-production
Consultation meetings with students and staff using small group working
Meetings with youth group
Meetings with policy-makers & practitioners
NR * * NIHR
  Rodriguez 2019 [69] University
Dundee
To develop co-design, implement and evaluate a series of oral health workshops with young people experiencing homelessness Qualitative
Nongovernmental organization managers and staff, practitioners, homeless young people
Eight workshops raising health awareness, including oral health, mental health, substance abuse and healthy eating Oral health Impact
Changes in behaviour, knowledge, health literacy, engagement with service providers
Methodological
Workshop experience; common positive elements of workshops
Co-design
Action research
Meetings
Workshops
Interviews
Mutual trust
Joint decision-making
* * Scottish Government and Health Service Board
  Scott 2020 [70] University
Dundee
To co-design and evaluate an animated film promoting oral health Evaluation (mixed-method)
Parent–child dyads
Short, animated film promoting oral health Oral health Impact
Oral health knowledge
Feedback on film content, messages and visuals
Output
Short film promoting oral health
Co-design
Workshops including an activity sheet, ranking exercise and feedback on storyboards and animated films
Interviews with parents
Questionnaire
Co-design and co-creation strategies mentioned (not elaborated) * * Public Health England
  Tribe 2019 [71] University
London
To discuss examples of co-produced mental health training, working with refugee or migrant community groups Qualitative
Academics, practitioners, community workers
Training for staff in a United Kingdom refugee community centre
Training workshop in Sri Lanka to develop skills for coping while living in a war zone
Mental health Health
knowledge and well-being
Impact
Contribution of co-production and partnership working to knowledge and practice
Co-production
Meetings
Workshop
Interviews
NR *   NR
  Whitham 2019 [72] University
Lancaster
To discuss risks and benefits of co-designing tools for use by practitioners and implications for sustainability and impact of co-design initiatives Case study
Health and social care staff and service uses
Tools to improve difficult conversations in health and social care practice (Leapfrog tools) Health and social care Output
Conversation tools for use by practitioners
Impact
Risks and benefits of co-designing tools for use by practitioners; sustainability of co-design initiatives
Co-design
Participatory action research
Tool co-design activities
Sharing activities to disseminate tools
Evaluation activities
Including all perspectives
Sharing of power
* * Arts and Humanities Research Council
 Systematic or evidence reviews or overviews (n = 10)
  Ball 2019 [73] Nonprofit organization
Cambridge
To review the evidence base on patient and public involvement (PPI) in research, in order to determine what is known in and where there are gaps Rapid evidence review NA Health services research Impact
Challenges to PPI
Impact of PPI
Various NA   * THIS Institute
  Barnett 2020 [74] University
United Kingdom/global
To discuss key challenges relating to interdisciplinarity, epidemiology, participatory epidemiology, including the meaning of co-production of knowledge Review NA Public health—One Health Conceptual
Understanding what co-production means in relation to knowledge production in One Health
Methodological
Challenges in doing co-production working across disciplines and cultures
Co-production NA *   Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
UK Research and Innovation
  Bench 2018 [75] University
London
To synthesize current evidence on best practice for PPI within critical care Scoping review NA Critical care Impact
Levels of involvement
Involving critical care patients
Barriers to/facilitators of PPI
Various NA * * NIHR
  Connolly 2020 [76] University
W Scotland
To learn how co-production and co-creation is understood, implemented and sustained within the health and social care system in Scotland Rapid evidence review NA Health & social care services Impact
Impacts pf co-production and co-creation on service improvements; evidence of effectiveness; barriers to & facilitators of co-production; sustainability of co-production and co-creation
Co-production
Co-creation in health & social care services
NA * * Scottish Improvement Science Collaborating Centre (SISCC)
  Green 2020 [77] University
Global
To examine the use (structure, process and outcomes) and reporting of EBCD in health service improvement activities Systematic review NA Health services research Methodological
Use of EBCD (structure, process, outcome)
Reporting of EBCD in health service improvement projects
EBCD NA * * University
Halvorsrud 2021 [16] University
NHS Trust
London
To investigate the effectiveness of co-creation/production in international health research Systematic review NA Public health Impact
Effects on health behaviours, service use and physical health
Methodological
Process elements in effective projects
Co-creation
Co-production
NA * * Lankelly Chase Foundation
  Pearce 2020 [78] University
United Kingdom/Australia
To propose a new definition of co-creation of knowledge based on the existing literature Literature Review NA Health research Conceptual
New definition of co-creation of new knowledge for health interventions
Co-creation NA * * Australian government scholarship
  Sherriff 2019 [79] University
Brighton
To determine what is known about healthcare inequalities faced by LGBTI people, the barriers faced whilst accessing healthcare, and by health professionals when providing care, and examples of promising practice Rapid reviews co-produced with LGBTI people NA Health inequalities Health
Inequalities and barriers to accessing healthcare
Co-production NA    European Parliament
  Slattery 2020 [15] University
Global
To identify the current approaches to research co-design in health settings and evidence of their effectiveness Rapid evidence review NA Health services research Conceptual
Co-design approaches and activities
Methodological
Effects of existing co-design approaches
Co-design NA *   Transport Accident Commission
  Tembo 2019 [80] University
Southampton
To explore whether and how the public can be involved in the co-production of research commissioning early on in the process Literature review NA Health research Conceptual
Whether and how public can be involved in research commissioning
Impact
Challenges to public involvement in early phase of applied health research
Co-production   * * NIHR
 Critical reflection or opinion (n = 20)
  Beresford 2019 [81] University
Essex
To put public and user involvement in health and social care into broader historical, theoretical and philosophical context Commentary NA Health research Impact
Identifies four key stages in development of public participation in health and social care; barriers/challenges to public participation; successful participation in learning & training and in research knowledge production
Co-production NA * * NR
  Dowie 2018 [82] University
London
To elaborate the implementation of apomediative (“direct-to-consumer”) decision support tools—used by individuals to help make healthcare decisions for themselves—through the technique of multi-criteria decision analysis Commentary NA Public health Conceptual
Importance of shared decision-making between patient and professional about healthcare, through the use of decision support tools
Co-creation
of health by patient and health professional
NR    No funding
  Green 2019 [13] University
Essex
To offer a global and provocative perspective on participation as emancipatory and reformative vs participation as a servant to neoliberal capital forces Commentary NA Health services research Conceptual
Theoretical critique of participation in healthcare
Methodological
Evidence about the potential for participation and co-production; realities and challenges in achieving co-production; ways to facilitate co-production
Co-production NA * * NR
  Fletcher 2020 [83] University
Edinburgh
To analyse how health research regulation is experienced by stakeholders in the United Kingdom Delphi survey NA Health research (regulation) Impact
Direct experience of health research regulation by researchers, regulators and experts
Co-production
Mentioned as an outcome not a process
NA *   Wellcome Trust
  Hoddinott 2018 [84] University
Scotland/United Kingdom
To outline how researchers can involve patients in funding applications and pitfalls to avoid Opinion NA Applied health research Conceptual
Definitions of patient and public involvement, co-design, co-production
Methodological
How to involve patients in research; opportunities and pitfalls
Co-production
Co-design
NA * * No funding
  Kaehne 2018 [85] University
Lancashire
To outline current thinking on co-production in health and social care, examine challenges in implementing genuine co-production Commentary NA Health and social care Conceptual
Definitions and explanations of co-production
Methodological
Establishing parameters of a co-production model; barriers to co-production in health and social care
Co-production NA * * NR
  Kislov 2018 [86] University
Manchester
To explore different definitions and types, tensions and compromises, and implications of, analyse the factors influencing, and share personal experiences of co-production Qualitative/participatory Interactive workshop Applied health research Conceptual
Definitions and types of co-production of evidence in applied health research
Methodological
Tensions and compromises of doing co-production; factors influencing processes and outcomes of co-production
Co-production NA * * NR
  Kislov 2019 [87] University
Manchester
To explore the processes, mechanisms and consequences of co-production between researchers and practitioners as an approach facilitating the implementation of research in healthcare organizations Case study
Producers and users of applied health research
Four applied health research projects Applied health research Conceptual
Definition of co-production approaches
Methodological
Compromises and negative consequences of co-production of applied health research
Co-production NA * * NR
  Lambert 2018 [88] University
London
To explore the development of co-production and service user involvement in United Kingdom university-based mental health research Commentary NA Mental health Conceptual
How co-production of mental health policy, practice and research is conceptualized
Methodological
Implications of co-production; reflection on the practice of research co-production (process, barriers, outcomes)
Co-production NA * * NR
  Langley 2018 [89] University
Sheffield
To explore the different domains of influence of collective making from a knowledge mobilization perspective Commentary NA Health and social care Conceptual
How the “collective making” co-design model contributes to co-creation of knowledge
Co-creation
Co-design
NA * * NIHR
  Lignou 2019 [90] University
Oxford
To describe how a co-produced public health intervention was developed Commentary NA Mental health Conceptual
Explains the application of the concept of co-production to mental health research in four iterative steps
Co-production NA * * NIHR
Wellcome
  Metz 2019 [91] University
London/US
To draw out the learning and reflect on the wider co-creation literature and debates Opinion NA Health services research Conceptual
Clarifying and characterizing the use of “co-creation”
Co-creation NA *   NR
  Norton 2019 [92] University
Ireland
To give guidance on how to implement co-production within Irish mental health services Opinion NA Mental health Conceptual
Definitions, types, principles and models of co-production; barriers to co-production; how to implement co-production
Co-production NA * * NR
  Palumbo 2018 [93] University
Europe
To conceptually explore the risks of value co-destruction in the patient–provider relationship and suggest a theoretical framework containing implementation issues of health services’ co-production Commentary NA Health services research Conceptual
Definition and distinction between individual and organizational health literacy
Output
Framework of factors for effective health services co-production—including individual and organizational health literacy
Co-production NA * * NR
  Realpe 2018 [94] University
Coventry
To establish a working definition of the co-production of health Commentary NA Health and social care Methodological
Model of the co-production of health in consultations
Skills of clinicians and patients, and the context and outcomes of co-productive consultations
Co-production NA *   NR
  Rose 2019 [95] University
London
To examine the concept and practice of co-production in mental health Commentary NA Mental health Conceptual
Historicizing co-production
Methodological
Context of co-production; positionality and co-production; privilege in knowledge generation
Co-production NA * * Wellcome
  Smith 2020 [96] University
Newcastle
To examine how Lean methods can be implemented and used to engage stakeholders in defining value and systems and processes in healthcare Commentary NA Health services research Methodological
Structured methods for co-production engaged stakeholders to articulate their own value perspectives
Co-design NA *   NR
  Syed 2019 [97] Government
Global
To outline a framework for facilitating co-creation of public health evidence Commentary NA Public health Methodological
Definition of co-creation; barriers and facilitators in use of public health evidence
Output
Evidence-informed public health conceptual framework
Co-creation NA    NR
  Thompson 2020 [98] University
Edinburgh
To describe what form co-production is taking and why in the context of NHS Scotland Commentary with case study NA Health services research Methodological
Examples of co-production within healthcare in Scotland
Conceptual
Co-production in governance arrangements
Co-design
Co-governance
NA * * No funding
  Wolstenholme 2019 [99] Professional clinical association London To discuss what co-production is and the impact it can have by drawing on a Twitter chat on co-production and management of acute and long-term stroke Opinion NA Acute care Methodological
Conditions for co-production to happen; activities that support co-production and co-creation; involvement of creative practitioners to improve co-creation process
Co-production
Co-creation
NA * NR
  1. NA not applicable, NHS National Health Service
  2. aCo-production principles and features as defined by NIHR (https://www.learningforinvolvement.org.uk/?opportunity=nihr-guidance-on-co-producing-a-research-project)
  3. bNR not reported
  4. * Indicates when a paper reports research or methodology gaps and/or policy/practice implications
  5. In column 2, the underlined text highlights the type of organisation. In column 8, the underlined text highlights the type of co-production used