Article type
Abstract
Background: There is a growing movement amongst evidence synthesists to incorporate diverse lived and professional experience into review projects. The literature on co-production in research generally recognises that there is a spectrum of approaches described as co-production (O’Mara-Eves et al., 2022, Fox et al. 2018, Oliver et al. 2019, Smith et al. 2022). Some research projects may not achieve meaningful involvement or uphold all principles commonly viewed as integral to co-production, with consequences for those involved and for the research. Furthermore, evaluation is rarely included (O’Mara-Eves et al. 2022).
Objectives: (1) To understand and evaluate experiences at the EPPI Centre and Co-Production Collective in adopting different forms of involvement in a variety of evidence synthesis projects. (2) To demonstrate how core principles of co-production can underpin any form of involvement to promote transparency and integrity, and build confidence in research outputs.
Methods: Co-production and involvement activities in six evidence synthesis-related projects will be presented as case studies. Different approaches to facilitate meaningful involvement will be mapped onto each stage of the projects. Constraints and facilitators that affected decisions relating to the planned approaches, and the co-production principles that were applied in each project, will be identified.
Results: Each project adopted different approaches that mapped onto varied stages of the projects because of a variety of constraints (e.g., time, complexity of topic) and facilitators (e.g., support from experienced co-producers). Not all core principles of co-production were consistently applied throughout the lifespan of the projects, in particular sharing decision-making. It was possible to apply most core principles during the main involvement stages.
Conclusions: There is no single approach to involvement and co-production for evidence synthesis, which must consider individual and contextual constraints and facilitators. It is possible, however, to apply core co-production principles wherever involvement occurs. Planned evaluation is important to better understand the value that different types of involvement and co-production can offer in evidence synthesis.
Relevance: By demonstrating how core co-production principles can be applied, this may help to recognise the resource and capacity needed to facilitate meaningful embedding of lived and professional experience.
Objectives: (1) To understand and evaluate experiences at the EPPI Centre and Co-Production Collective in adopting different forms of involvement in a variety of evidence synthesis projects. (2) To demonstrate how core principles of co-production can underpin any form of involvement to promote transparency and integrity, and build confidence in research outputs.
Methods: Co-production and involvement activities in six evidence synthesis-related projects will be presented as case studies. Different approaches to facilitate meaningful involvement will be mapped onto each stage of the projects. Constraints and facilitators that affected decisions relating to the planned approaches, and the co-production principles that were applied in each project, will be identified.
Results: Each project adopted different approaches that mapped onto varied stages of the projects because of a variety of constraints (e.g., time, complexity of topic) and facilitators (e.g., support from experienced co-producers). Not all core principles of co-production were consistently applied throughout the lifespan of the projects, in particular sharing decision-making. It was possible to apply most core principles during the main involvement stages.
Conclusions: There is no single approach to involvement and co-production for evidence synthesis, which must consider individual and contextual constraints and facilitators. It is possible, however, to apply core co-production principles wherever involvement occurs. Planned evaluation is important to better understand the value that different types of involvement and co-production can offer in evidence synthesis.
Relevance: By demonstrating how core co-production principles can be applied, this may help to recognise the resource and capacity needed to facilitate meaningful embedding of lived and professional experience.