ArticleBMJ global health2024
Living labs for migrant health research: the challenge of cocreating research with migrant population and policy makers.
Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- One health approach to chagas disease: a systematic review on the integration of human, animal, and environmental health.Frontiers in health services · 2026Pooled it
- The burden, clinical outcomes and risk factors related to neglected tropical diseases and malaria in migrant populations in the Middle East and North Africa: a systematic review and meta-analyses.BMJ global health · 2025Pooled it
- Communities of Practice and Living Labs: A Scoping Review of Principles and Methodologies for Involvement of Lived Experience Experts in Health and Healthcare Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for the public to take an active role in scientific research is becoming increasingly important, particularly in health-related research. However, the coexistence and alignment of scientific and citizen interests, needs, knowledge and timing is not straightforward, especially when involving migrant populations. To conduct impactful research, it becomes also essential to consider the perspectives of policymakers, thereby adding a layer of complexity to the processes.In this article we address the experience of a living lab created in a research institution and supported by the city council and a local foundation, in which we developed three experiences of patient and public involvement (PPI): (1) accessing to comprehensive care for people at risk of Chagas disease; (2) strategies towards improving access and quality of mental healthcare services in migrants; (3) promoting healthy and safe school environments in vulnerable urban settings.These three challenges provided an opportunity to delve into diverse strategies for involving key stakeholders, including migrant populations, expert researchers and political actors in health research. This article offers insights into the successes, challenges, and valuable lessons learnt from these endeavours, providing a vision that can be beneficial for future initiatives. Each living lab experience crafted its unique governance system and agenda tailored to specific challenge scenarios, giving rise to diverse methods and study designs.We have found that the management of the cocreation of the research question and the institutional support are key to building robust PPI processes with migrant groups.
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.