ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2022
Participant perspectives of an online co-design process to develop a prevention-focused mental health and well-being platform for primary producers.
Article in The Australian journal of rural health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- A rapid review of digital approaches for the participatory development of health-related interventions.Frontiers in public health · 2024Review
- Participant perspectives of an online co-design process to develop a prevention-focused mental health and well-being platform for primary producers.The Australian journal of rural health · 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
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo explore participant experiences of an online co-design process to develop a web-based preventative mental health and well-being intervention targeting primary producers in rural Australia.
settingRural Victoria, Australia.
participantsParticipants from a primary producer background, including horticulture, fisheries, animal cultivation and farm consultancy, were eligible for the study if they had participated in both the co-design and beta testing processes for a primary producer platform.
designA qualitative study using semi-structured phone-based interviews was undertaken. A reflexive inductive approach to data analysis was employed to develop themes.
resultsEleven participants were interviewed, with an average age of 51 years, of which 7 were female. Five main themes were developed. These included: (1) participant diversity, (2) impact of online delivery on co-design participation, (3) experiences of the co-design process, (4) maintaining a shared vision and goals and (5) acting on the co-design recommendations. Use of online methods was a clear enabler to engage participants who were geographically dispersed and offers an alternative to more conventional approaches to co-design using face-to-face methods. Some aspects of participant engagement may need a greater focus when conducted online compared with face-to-face.
conclusionsUsing an online co-design method to develop a preventative mental health and well-being web-based platform for primary producers was novel. Findings address a gap in the literature around the experience of participants engaging in a co-design process and identify opportunities to improve participant engagement and experience with the online format.
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.