Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39122385›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2024

Evidence-informed, experience-based co-design: a novel framework integrating research evidence and lived experience in priority-setting and co-design of health services.

Claire Morley, Kim Jose, Sonj E Hall, Kelly Shaw, Deirdre McGowan, Martina Wyss, Tania Winzenberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Co-Designing a Prototype Education and Training Intervention for Healthcare Professionals Working in Community Laryngectomy Care: An Experience-Based Co-Design Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The IMPROV Project: Protocol for Using a Modified Nominal Group Technique to Prioritise Oral Health Promotion Strategies With the Karen Refugee Community in Victoria.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  8. Consumer and Stakeholder Perspectives About the Lived Experience Advisor Programme: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. "The Poorer You Are, the Harder It Is": Perspectives on Community Health Promotion in Tasmania.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    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.

Claire MorleyMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia claire.morley@utas.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-9721-9225
Kim JoseMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Sonj E HallBellberry Ltd, Eastwood, South Australia, Australia.
Kelly ShawMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Deirdre McGowanMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Martina WyssPrimary Health Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia.
Tania WinzenbergMenzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4112-3491

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe a new co-design framework termed Evidence-informed, Experience-based Co-design (E2CD).

backgroundInvolving consumers and clinicians in planning, designing and implementing services results in the end-product being more likely to meet the needs of end-users and increases the likelihood of their uptake and sustainability. Different forms and definitions of co-design have been described in the literature and have had varying levels of success in health service redesign. However, many fall short of including people with lived experience in all aspects of the process, particularly in setting priorities for service (re)design. In addition, health services need to deliver evidence-based care as well as care that meets the needs of users, yet few ways of integrating research evidence into co-design processes are described. This paper describes a new framework to approach co-design which addresses these issues. We believe that it offers a roadmap to address some of healthcare's most wicked problems and potentially improve outcomes for some of the most vulnerable people in our society. We use improving services for people with high healthcare service utilisation as a working example of the Framework's application.

conclusionEvidence-informed experience-based co-design has the potential to be used as a framework for co-design that integrates research evidence with lived experience and provides people with lived experience a central role in decision-making about prioritising and designing services to meet their needs.

Indexed as

Health PrioritiesDelivery of Health CareEvidence-Based PracticeHealth ServicesHumansHealth policyOrganisation of health servicesPatient ParticipationPrimary Health CarePUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID39122385
PMCPMC11404138

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.