ReviewInternational journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being2024
Research circles as a method for implementing new services in the public health and welfare system.
Review in International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficiency dynamics in Latin American healthcare reforms: a comprehensive growth mixture analysis within institutional theory.Journal of health organization and management · 2025Article
- The journey of discovery in co-creating knowledge to find a new way of working in municipal home care-seven lessons learned in a participatory appreciative action and reflection study.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCo-creation has become a guiding principle in public service innovation, but more knowledge is still needed on overcoming barriers and increasing the effectiveness of co-creation processes. This study explores the research circle method as a concrete methodology for co-creation, and its application within two cases involving the implementation of new services for drug death-bereaved persons in Norway based on new research-based knowledge.
methodThe study followed an action research design. The field notes and audio recordings were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsThe analysis identified two key dimensions experienced as important for the implementation of the new services when research circles were used as a method for co-creation: 1) the inclusion of participants from different contexts and 2) support structures for service interventions. DISCUSSION: Research circles are discussed as an important support structure for promoting public value co-creation that can contribute to increasing stakeholders' capacity for implementing services in the public system, especially when the focus is on the perspectives and interests of stakeholders, such as practitioners and management in public health and welfare services. However, the discussion also points to barriers relating to the co-creation process that need to be considered when planning research circle-based interventions.
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.