Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36250962›Full record

ArticleThe Australian journal of rural health2022

From co-design to co-production: Approaches, enablers, and constraints in developing a public health, capacity-building solution.

Catherine Cosgrave, Alison Kennedy, Timo Dietrich, Kate Gunn, Joanna MacDonald, Claire McKay, Sally Cunningham, Sam Haren, Josh Lewis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Are codesigned programmes more difficult to implement? A qualitative study of staff perceptions on the implementation of a new youth mental health programme.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Catherine CosgraveSchool of Rural Medicine, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8491-3282
Alison KennedyNational Centre for Farmer Health, Deakin University, Hamilton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4450-8434
Timo DietrichSocial Marketing @ Griffith, Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4824-6117
Kate GunnDepartment of Rural Health, Allied Health and Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0837-6814
Joanna MacDonaldNational Centre for Farmer Health, Deakin University, Hamilton, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1062-9219
Claire McKayNational Centre for Farmer Health, Deakin University, Hamilton, Victoria, Australia.
Sally CunninghamNational Centre for Farmer Health, Deakin University, Hamilton, Victoria, Australia.
Sam HarenSandpit, Kent Town, South Australia, Australia.
Josh LewisHere! Here! Design, Parkside, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

WorkSafe Victoria WorkWell Mental Health Improvement Fund - Round 3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInvestigating how co-designed knowledge can be translated to co-produce a public health capacity-building solution for difficult-to-engage population groups drawing on the co-production experience of a prevention-focused, capacity-building mental health solution targeting primary producers.

designA qualitative study undertaken in rural and regional Victoria involving members of the design working group including project team (7px), digital design team (5px), marketing team (3px), and funding partner representatives. The study design involved reflective practice to collect data to identify the phases of co-production and assess the design working group members' experiences. The analysis involved inductive coding using Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis.

objectiveIdentifying major points of divergence and/or convergence; enablers and/or constraints; and ways to better navigate and strengthen the co-production process. FINDING: Given members of the design working group, diverse skills sets divergence was experienced in all co-production phases. Divergence was also experienced between the project team and the funding partner given the uniqueness of working conditions and requirements of workers in the primary production industry. The project team applied an iterative development process to project management; encouraging iterative cycles to create/test/revise among the teams, and with the funding partner, until each was satisfied with the end result (convergence). DISCUSSION &

conclusionWhen developing a co-created public health prevention campaign it is critical that the project team focuses on relationship building among the members of the design working group and ensures adequate resourcing, development of shared understanding of project goals and target audience, ongoing communication, and a commitment to working iteratively.

Indexed as

Public HealthWorking ConditionsHumansQualitative Researchimplementing evidencenew models and frameworkspublic healthrural issuesrural mental health

Identifiers

PMID36250962
PMCPMC10092375

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.