ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2023
'Building bridges': reflections and recommendations for co-producing health research.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Best practices for engaging lived experience experts in dialogues about climate change and mental health: lessons learned from a global effort.BMC global and public health · 2026Review
- Conceptualising and operationalising 'patient and public involvement' (PPI) and 'responsible research and innovation' (RRI) in youth mental health research: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Review
- Sailing Into Uncharted Territory: Victim Survivors' Perspectives on Some of the Tensions of Engagement as Partners in Co-Design Research.Violence against women · 2026Article
- A three-way partnership: reflections and lessons from co-producing social care research with practitioners, researchers and the public.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Exploring Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in youth mental health: reflections from researchers and young people.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- 'Co-Production Is Caring': Young People's Reflections on Responsible and Dialogic Co-Production in Youth Mental Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Designing and delivering palliative and end of life care research with people living with HIV: reflections from a co-produced study.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Co-production in HIV research: a case study from the COVID-19 pandemic.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Redesigning mental health research systems from within: the role of peer-led co-production.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Healthcare professional communication behaviours, skills, barriers, and enablers: Exploring the perspectives of people living with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Health psychology openArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCo-produced research is when all stakeholders, including experts by experience and researchers, work together to conceptualise, design, deliver and disseminate research to enhance understanding and knowledge. This type of participatory inquiry is being increasingly used across health research; however, it continues to be a complex area to navigate given existing institutional structures. MAIN BODY: We collaborated across three independent co-produced research studies to share insights, reflections, and knowledge of our work in the fields of HIV, mental health, and disability research. We co-designed and delivered a three-hour online workshop at a conference to share these reflections using the metaphor of 'building bridges' to describe our co-production journey. We generated key principles of co-production from our different experiences working in each individual research project as well as together across the three projects. Our principles are to: (1) be kind, have fun and learn from each other; (2) share power (as much as you can with people); (3) connect with people you know and don't know; (4) remain connected; and (5) use clear and simple language.
conclusionWe recommend that co-produced research needs additional funding, resource, and flexibility to remain impactful and ethical. Co-produced research teams need to be mindful of traditional power structures and ensure that the process is transparent, fair, and ethical. Addressing equality, diversity, and inclusion of traditionally underrepresented groups in research is essential as are the skills, expertise, and experiences of all members of the co-production team.
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.