SynthesisBMJ open2023
Measurement and outcomes of co-production in health and social care: a systematic review of empirical studies.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meaningful voluntary work design and dual pathways for healthy aging (MVP-HA): a cross-sectional and mixed-methods study in Hong Kong.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- Co-creation, co-design or co-production? Reflections on the development of urban health systems implementation strategies to improve access and quality of primary healthcare services in Bangladesh, Ghana, Nepal and Nigeria.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Co-Designing Local Collaboration Between Social Services, Primary Healthcare, and the Third Sector-A Realist Process Evaluation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Leveraging co-production in the systematic review of evidence to update the pan-Canadian Oncology Symptom Triage and Remote Support (COSTaRS) practice guides.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2026Article
- Article
- From bedside to bench: towards clinical predictive AI research that achieves real-world impact.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Development and validation of the UserInvolve comprehensive toolkit for evaluating co-production in research: A guiding resource for researchers.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Demystifying programme theories of co-production in health and welfare: An interview study on new researchers' systems perspectives.Health research policy and systems · 2025Article
- Are We There Yet? Co-Production in Recovery Colleges.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025Article
- Integrating patient and public involvement into co-design of healthcare improvement: a case study in maternity care.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Article
- Increasing the inclusivity of digital health co-production: an integrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Review
- Article
- Mechanisms for co-designing and co-producing health and social care: a realist synthesis.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Review
- Co-production of a systematic review on decision coaching: a mixed methods case study within a review.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Applied Principles for Inclusive Practice in Neurodevelopmental Research: A Selection and Report of Illustrative Case Studies.Current developmental disorders reports · 2024Review
- Research Coproduction: How Can Coproduction Teams Increase Traffic on the Pathway to Impact? Comment on "Research Coproduction: An Underused Pathway to Impact".International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCo-production is promoted as an effective way of improving the quality of health and social care but the diversity of measures used in individual studies makes their outcomes difficult to interpret.
objectiveThe objective is to explore how empirical studies in health and social care have described the outcomes of co-production projects and how those outcomes were measured. DESIGN AND
methodsA scoping review forms the basis for this systematic review. Search terms for the concepts (co-produc* OR coproduc* OR co-design* OR codesign*) and contexts (health OR 'public service* OR "public sector") were used in: CINAHL with Full Text (EBSCOHost), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (Wiley), MEDLINE (EBSCOHost), PsycINFO (ProQuest), PubMed (legacy) and Scopus (Elsevier). There was no date limit. Papers describing the process, original data and outcomes of co-production were included. Protocols, reviews and theoretical, conceptual and psychometric papers were excluded. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline was followed. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool underpinned the quality of included papers.
results43 empirical studies were included. They were conducted in 12 countries, with the UK representing >50% of all papers. No paper was excluded due to the Mixed Methods Quality Appraisal screening and 60% of included papers were mixed methods studies. The extensive use of self-developed study-specific measures hampered comparisons and cumulative knowledge-building. Overall, the studies reported positive outcomes. Co-production was reported to be positively experienced and provided important learning.
conclusionsThe lack of common approaches to measuring co-production is more problematic than the plurality of measurements itself. Co-production should be measured from three perspectives: outputs of co-production processes, the experiences of participating in co-production processes and outcomes of co-production. Both self-developed study-specific measures and established measures should be used. The maturity of this research field would benefit from the development and use of reporting guidelines.
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.