ArticleBMJ open2021
Evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of a co-design approach to developing an integrated model of care for people with multi-morbid COPD in rural Nepal: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A rapid review to inform the policy and practice for the implementation of chronic disease prevention and management programs for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in primary care.Health research policy and systems · 2024Pooled it
- Conducting co-creation for public health in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and key informant perspectives on implementation barriers and facilitators.Globalization and health · 2024Pooled it
- The co-creation of Foot Selfie, a patient-centered mobile intervention to prevent diabetic foot ulcers.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Impact of Regulatory Guidelines on Market Adoption and Implementation of Telehealth for COPD Patients: A Systematic Literature Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Processes Underpinning Successful Co-Design: Lessons From a Digital Health Project.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Developing an integrated depression and tuberculosis care pathway using a co-design approach in a low-resource setting.International journal of mental health systems · 2025Article
- Taking a partnership approach to embed physical activity in local policy and practice: a Bradford District case study.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Article
- Genotes - a 'just-in-time' genomics education resource co-designed with clinicians.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Reflections on co-producing an obesity-prevention toolkit for Islamic Religious Settings: a qualitative process evaluation.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024Article
- Narrative synthesis of the effectiveness and characteristics of heart failure disease self-management support programmes.ESC heart failure · 2024Review
- Assessing the implementation fidelity, feasibility, and sustainability of community-based house improvement for malaria control in southern Malawi: a mixed-methods study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Empowering Ontario's long-term care residents to shape the place they call home: a codesign protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Article
- Potentials and challenges of using co-design in health services research in low- and middle-income countries.Global health research and policy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo understand the feasibility and acceptability of a co-design approach to developing an integrated model of healthcare for people with multi-morbid chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in rural Nepal. SETTINGS: A rural setting of Nepal.
participantsData collection included five video recordings, five key informant interviews and observation notes from a final co-design workshop that involved a total of 68 stakeholders: persons with COPD and their family members; healthcare providers, including respiratory physicians; local community leaders; representatives from local, provincial and federal government; academics; and representatives from non-government organisations. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility and acceptability of using a co-design approach to develop an integrated model of care for people with multi-morbid COPD in rural Nepal.
resultsOur qualitative evaluation of the Hasso Plattner's co-design process found that all stakeholders (including people with COPD/community members, primary care practitioners and local government/senior health officials) were actively engaged in and significantly contributed to the process of co-design. Four main themes were identified which determined the feasibility and acceptability of the resulting integrated model of care: engagement of stakeholders, factors contributing to the co-design, consequences of the co-design process, and challenges and opportunities learnt by the researchers and participants in the co-design process. Based on the relationship between the four main themes emerging from this research, we developed an evaluation framework to guide the co-design of a health service innovation.
conclusionOur study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the Hasso Plattner's co-design process. Our findings suggest that this co-design approach can be useful and acceptable to local communities and government agencies. It enabled the meaningful contribution of a diverse group of stakeholders in the design and delivery of health services in low-income and middle-income countries.
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.