ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2024
Shining a light on the road towards conducting principle-based co-production research in rehabilitation.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design Recommendations for Virtual Reality-Based Upper Limb Exercises From People With Tetraplegia and Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation Specialists: Focus Group Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2026Article
- Extraordinary abilities, creativity, and love, in the path of dementia: a perspective article on the Walking the Talk for Dementia 2025 initiative.Frontiers in dementia · 2026Article
- Article
- Unpacking how trust, communication and flow interact to sustain quality relationships between disabled people, family and support workers: a realist qualitative study.Disability and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- 'Wisdom Is Knowledge Plus Experience': Qualitative Study of Lived Experience and Researcher Perspectives on Suicide Research Co-Production.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Moving from participatory approaches incorporating co-design to co-production in health research involves a commitment to full engagement and partnership with people with lived experience through all stages of the research process-start to finish. However, despite the increased enthusiasm and proliferation of research that involves co-production, practice remains challenging, due in part to the lack of consensus on what constitutes co-production, a lack of guidance about the practical steps of applying this approach in respect to diverse research methods from multiple paradigms, and structural barriers within academia research landscape. To navigate the challenges in conducting co-produced research, it has been recommended that attention be paid to focusing and operationalising the underpinning principles and aspirations of co-production research, to aid translation into practice. In this article, we describe some fundamental principles essential to conducting co-production research (sharing power, relational resilience, and adopting a learning mindset) and provide tangible, practical strategies, and processes to engage these values. In doing so, we hope to support rehabilitation researchers who wish to engage in co-production to foster a more equitable, ethical, and impactful collaboration with people with lived experience and those involved in their circle of care.
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.