Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36361197›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

How Do We Know Co-Created Solutions Work Effectively within the Real World of People Living with Dementia? Learning Methodological Lessons from a Co-Creation-to-Evaluation Case Study.

Grahame Smith, Chloe Dixon, Rafaela Neiva Ganga, Daz Greenop

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Grahame SmithFaculty of Health, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool L2 2ER, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1859-6036
Chloe DixonFaculty of Health, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool L2 2ER, UK.
Rafaela Neiva GangaFaculty of Business and Law, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool L3 5UG, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9163-0013
Daz GreenopFaculty of Health, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool L2 2ER, UK.
Liverpool John Moores University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Living Labs (LL) are a novel and potentially robust way of addressing real-life health challenges, especially within the dementia field. Generally, LLs focus on co-creating through implementing the quadruple helix partnership as a user-centric approach to co-creating. In the context of this paper, the users were people with dementia and their informal carers. LL are not necessarily environments that evaluate these co-created innovations within the real world. Considering this disconnect between co-creation and real-world evaluation, this paper, as a critical commentary, will reflect on the methodological lessons learnt during the development of an LL model aimed at addressing this discrepancy. The LL at Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU) was commissioned to co-create and then evaluate a new Dementia Reablement Service. The case study findings revealed that the Dementia Reablement Service had a positive impact on the quality of life of people with dementia, suggesting that the service is a catalyst for positive change. In addition, the critical learning from this case study highlights the potential role of LLs in seamlessly co-creating and then evaluating the co-created solution within the real world. A benefit of this way of working is that it provides opportunities for LLs to secure access to traditional research funding.

Indexed as

DementiaCaregiversHumansQuality of Lifeco-creationdementiaevaluationLiving Labmethodologyreablement

Identifiers

PMID36361197
PMCPMC9654242
OpenAlexW4308068212

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.