Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38287410›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Exploring Elinor Ostrom's principles for collaborative group working within a user-led project: lessons from a collaboration between researchers and a user-led organisation.

Bella Wheeler, Oli Williams, Becki Meakin, Eleni Chambers, Peter Beresford, Sarah O'Brien, Glenn Robert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Bella WheelerNuffield Department of Primary Health Care Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.
Oli WilliamsFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, 57 Waterloo Road, Waterloo, SE1 8WA, UK.
Becki MeakinShaping Our Lives National User Network CIC, 30 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3LE, UK.
Eleni ChambersShaping Our Lives National User Network CIC, 30 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3LE, UK.
Peter BeresfordShaping Our Lives National User Network CIC, 30 St Giles', Oxford, OX1 3LE, UK.
Sarah O'BrienFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, 57 Waterloo Road, Waterloo, SE1 8WA, UK.
Glenn RobertFlorence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, King's College London, 57 Waterloo Road, Waterloo, SE1 8WA, UK. glenn.robert@kcl.ac.uk.

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/V006363/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSome research has been undertaken into the mechanisms that shape successful participatory approaches in the context of efforts to improve health and social care. However, greater attention needs to be directed to how partnerships between researchers and user-led organisations (ULOs) might best be formed, practiced, managed, and assessed. We explored whether political economist Elinor Ostrom's Nobel prize winning analysis of common pool resource management-specifically eight principles to enhance collaborative group working as derived from her empirical research-could be usefully applied within a user-led project aiming to co-design new services to support more inclusive involvement of Disabled people in decision-making processes in policy and practice.

methodsParticipant observation and participatory methods over a 16-month period comprising observational notes of online user-led meetings (26 h), online study team meetings (20 h), online Joint Interpretive Forum meetings (8 h), and semi-structured one-to-one interviews with project participants (44 h) at two time points (months 6 and 10).

resultsInitially it proved difficult to establish working practices informed by Ostrom's principles for collaborative group working within the user-led project. Several attempts were made to put a structure in place that met the needs of both the research study and the aims of the user-led project, but this was not straightforward. An important shift saw a move away from directly applying the principles to the working practices of the group and instead applying them to specific tasks the group were undertaking. This was a helpful realisation which enabled the principles to become-for most but not all participants-a useful facilitation device in the latter stages of the project. Eventually we applied the principles in a way that was useful and enabled collaboration between researchers and a ULO (albeit in unexpected ways).

conclusionsOur joint reflections emphasise the importance of being reflexive and responsive when seeking to apply theories of collaboration (the principles) within user-led work. At an early stage, it is important to agree shared definitions and understanding of what 'user-led' means in practice. It is crucial to actively adapt and translate the principles in ways that make them more accessible and applicable within groups where prior knowledge of their origins is both unlikely and unnecessary.

Indexed as

Collaborative group workingInclusionInclusive involvementInnovationMethodologyOstromUser-led organisation

Identifiers

PMID38287410
PMCPMC10826181

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.