Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33237552›Full record

SynthesisPrevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research2021

Co-production as an Emerging Methodology for Developing School-Based Health Interventions with Students Aged 11-16: Systematic Review of Intervention Types, Theories and Processes and Thematic Synthesis of Stakeholders' Experiences.

Hayley Reed, Danielle Couturiaux, Marianne Davis, Amy Edwards, Edward Janes, Hyun Sue Kim, G J Melendez-Torres, Simon Murphy, Torill Alise Rotevatn, Jesse Smith and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. An umbrella review of reviews on challenges to meaningful adolescent involvement in health research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A Co-Produced Health Literacy Programme for Pregnant Women Whose First Language Is Not English: A Qualitative Study of Women's Experiences.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Public Involvement in Complex Theorising: A Co-Produced Logic Model of the Role of Context in Shaping Child Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Coproducing an Ecological Momentary Assessment Measurement Burst Mental Health Study With Young People: The MHIM Coproduction Protocol.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Hayley ReedDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK. reedhm@cardiff.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3388-8902
Danielle CouturiauxDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Marianne DavisDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Amy EdwardsDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Edward JanesDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Hyun Sue KimDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
G J Melendez-TorresDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Simon MurphyDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Torill Alise RotevatnPublic Health and Epidemiology Group, Department of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Niels Jernes Vej 14, 9220, Aalborg East, Denmark.
Jesse SmithDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.
Rhiannon EvansDECIPHer, UKCRC Centre of Excellence, Cardiff University, 1-3 Museum Place, Cardiff, CF10 3BD, UK.

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKMedical Research Council MR/K023233/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Co-production affords an intervention's target population the opportunity to participate in intervention theory decision-making during the development process. This addresses the over-reliance on developing interventions through academic theories which can be devoid of contextual understanding and result in challenges to implementing school-based health programmes. There is an emergent empirical literature on co-producing school-based health interventions, but an understanding of appropriate theoretical types and processes and stakeholders' experiences is lacking. Through the conduct of a systematic review, this study seeks to understand the types and underlying theories and processes for co-production in school-based health interventions with students aged 11-16. A thematic synthesis explored stakeholders' experiences of the different types of co-production. A systematic search of five electronic bibliographic databases, citation tracking of included studies, and consultation with an expert international panel were employed. Of 27,433 unique papers, 30 papers representing 22 studies were retained to describe types, and 23 papers of 18 studies used to synthesise stakeholders' experiences. Three types were identified: external, individual-level, and system-level capacity-building. Whilst this review showed variability in co-production types, stakeholders involved and processes, shared functions were identified. Students', school staff, facilitators' and researchers' experiences in terms of acceptability, feasibility and undertaking decision-making are discussed. Recommendations for conceptualising and reporting co-production and process evaluations of co-produced school-based health interventions are highlighted.

Indexed as

School Health ServicesSchoolsStudentsAdolescentChildHumansCo-productionIntervention developmentSchool healthStudentsSystematic reviewThematic synthesis

Identifiers

PMID33237552
PMCPMC8060205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.