ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2016
Tackling wicked problems in infection prevention and control: a guideline for co-creation with stakeholders.
Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unveiling practical insights of eHealth implementation in Europe: a grey literature review on legal, ethical, financial, and technological (LEFT) considerations.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- PRODUCES+: Guidance for co-creation in public health informed by evidence and user experience.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Development of blueprint materials that strengthen and embed the infection control link nurse role in hospitals - an action research study.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Co-creating mental health promotion and prevention interventions with groups in vulnerable situations in Europe: a mixed-methods study protocol for co-creation implementation and participatory evaluation.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Collaborating Across Organizational Boundaries to Develop, Evaluate, and Implement eHealth: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The CeHRes Roadmap 2.0: Update of a Holistic Framework for Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of eHealth Technologies.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Methods Used in Co-Creation Within the Health CASCADE Co-Creation Database and Gray Literature: Systematic Methods Overview.Interactive journal of medical research · 2024Review
- Barriers, Facilitators, and Requirements for a Telerehabilitation Aftercare Program for Patients After Occupational Injuries: Semistructured Interviews With Key Stakeholders.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Achieving inter- and transdisciplinarity in Ecohealth: insights from a rodent-borne disease project in a polycrisis era.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- How to create value with unobtrusive monitoring technology in home-based dementia care: a multimethod study among key stakeholders.BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
- Methods for Human-Centered eHealth Development: Narrative Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
- Implementation of health technology: Directions for research and practice.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
- Designing a stakeholder-inclusive service model for an eHealth service to support older adults in an active and social life.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Identifying Persuasive Design Principles and Behavior Change Techniques Supporting End User Values and Needs in eHealth Interventions for Long-Term Weight Loss Maintenance: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Institutional Engagement Practices as Barriers to Public Health Capacity in Climate Change Policy Discourse: Lessons from the Canadian Province of Ontario.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- How Geographical Isolation and Aging in Place Can Be Accommodated Through Connected Health Stakeholder Management: Qualitative Study With Focus Groups.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Creating value with eHealth: identification of the value proposition with key stakeholders for the resilience navigator app.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- A Stakeholder Analysis of Schistosomiasis Diagnostic Landscape in South-West Nigeria: Insights for Diagnostics Co-creation.Frontiers in public health · 2020Article
- Organization and training at national level of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control activities in Europe: an ESCMID cross-sectional survey.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2019Article
- Does urbanization make emergence of zoonosis more likely? Evidence, myths and gaps.Environment and urbanization · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfection prevention and control can be seen as a wicked public health problem as there is no consensus regarding problem definition and solution, multiple stakeholders with different needs and values are involved, and there is no clear end-point of the problem-solving process. Co-creation with stakeholders has been proposed as a suitable strategy to tackle wicked problems, yet little information and no clear step-by-step guide exist on how to do this. The objectives of this study were to develop a guideline to assist developers in tackling wicked problems using co-creation with stakeholders, and to apply this guideline to practice with an example case in the field of infection prevention and control.
methodsA mixed-method approach consisting of the integration of both quantitative and qualitative research was used. Relevant stakeholders from the veterinary, human health, and public health sectors were identified using a literature scan, expert recommendations, and snowball sampling. The stakeholder salience approach was used to select key stakeholders based on 3 attributes: power, legitimacy, and urgency. Key values of stakeholders (N = 20) were derived by qualitative semi-structured interviews and quantitatively weighted and prioritized using an online survey.
resultsOur method showed that stakeholder identification and analysis are prerequisites for understanding the complex stakeholder network that characterizes wicked problems. A total of 73 stakeholders were identified of which 36 were selected as potential key stakeholders, and only one was seen as a definite stakeholder. In addition, deriving key stakeholder values is a necessity to gain insights into different problem definitions, solutions and needs stakeholders have regarding the wicked problem. Based on the methods used, we developed a step-by-step guideline for co-creation with stakeholders when tackling wicked problems.
conclusionsThe mixed-methods guideline presented here provides a systematic, transparent method to identify, analyze, and co-create with stakeholders, and to recognize and prioritize their values, problem definitions, and solutions in the context of wicked problems. This guideline consists of a general framework and although it was applied in an eHealth context, may be relevant outside of eHealth as well.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.