ArticleImplementation science communications2022
Evaluating research co-production: protocol for the Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro) framework.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge Translation Interventions for Youth Health Care Transitions: Protocol for a Realist Review.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Embedding coproduction: translational impacts of a sustained research-policy coalition in Tasmania, Australia.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Exploring Co-production as an Implementation Strategy for Trauma-Informed Care in a Youth-Focused HIV Clinic in Memphis, Tennessee: Mixed Methods Research.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the UserInvolve comprehensive toolkit for evaluating co-production in research: A guiding resource for researchers.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- How and why funders support engaged research.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Participatory research with youth with disabilities: Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa.African journal of disability · 2024Article
- Shining a light on the road towards conducting principle-based co-production research in rehabilitation.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Evaluating the quality of research co-production: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro).Health research policy and systems · 2023Article
- Understanding implementation research collaborations from a co-creation lens: Recommendations for a path forward.Frontiers in health services · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 13 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResearch co-production is an umbrella term used to describe research users and researchers working together to generate knowledge. Research co-production is used to create knowledge that is relevant to current challenges and to increase uptake of that knowledge into practice, programs, products, and/or policy. Yet, rigorous theories and methods to assess the quality of co-production are limited. Here we describe a framework for assessing the quality of research co-production-Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro)-and outline our field test of this approach.
methodsUsing a co-production approach, we aim to field test the relevance and utility of the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework. To do so, we will recruit participants who have led research co-production projects from the international Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network. We aim to sample 16 to 20 co-production project leads, assign these participants to dyadic groups (8 to 10 dyads), train each participant in the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework using deliberative workshops and oversee a simulation assessment exercise using RQ+ 4 Co-Pro within dyadic groups. To study this experience, we use a qualitative design to collect participant demographic information and project demographic information and will use in-depth semi-structured interviews to collect data related to the experience each participant has using the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework. DISCUSSION: This study will yield knowledge about a new way to assess research co-production. Specifically, it will address the relevance and utility of using RQ+ 4 Co-Pro, a framework that includes context as an inseparable component of research, identifies dimensions of quality matched to the aims of co-production, and applies a systematic and transferable evaluative method for reaching conclusions. This is a needed area of innovation for research co-production to reach its full potential. The findings may benefit co-producers interested in understanding the quality of their work, but also other stewards of research co-production. Accordingly, we undertake this study as a co-production team representing multiple perspectives from across the research enterprise, such as funders, journal editors, university administrators, and government and health organization leaders.
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.