ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024
The lived experience of co-production: Reflective accounts from the InCLUDE project.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of a psychoeducational group intervention for adults diagnosed with ADHD: a pilot randomized controlled study.BMC psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Embedding Multiperspective Reflections in Co-Producing a Training Intervention for Care Home Staff: Understanding Group Members' Journeys and Impacts.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- A three-way partnership: reflections and lessons from co-producing social care research with practitioners, researchers and the public.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- A systematic review of co-production approaches that involve family members, loved ones, or carers in the development of mental health or substance use resources/interventions.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Review
- Square peg round hole: navigating operational and interdisciplinary challenges in a co-produced, community-based research partnership.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Public Involvement in Complex Theorising: A Co-Produced Logic Model of the Role of Context in Shaping Child Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Co-Development of the CoMUni Intervention: A Social-Media-Based Resource to Increase Mental Health Help-Seeking Behaviours in UK Undergraduates.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Strategies for improving maternal care for ethnic minority women with obstetric anal sphincter injuries in the UK.BMC health services research · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe value of co-produced research in health and social care is increasingly recognised, but accounts into the processes and individual experiences of co-producing research are lacking. This paper describes the personal journeys of four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) throughout the life course of a co-produced research project exploring the barriers and facilitators to inclusive research in foster caring, the InCLUDE project.
methodsEach researcher kept a diary throughout the InCLUDE project of their personal reflections, questions, and learning. These were synthesised and reviewed by the researchers and two colleagues external to the team, and key themes were extracted.
resultsNarratives constructed from the diaries are presented in relation to distinct aspects of the co-production journey, alongside illustrative quotes. These aspects include: motivations for starting the project; making sense of the project; defining roles and responsibilities; challenges; and reflections on acquired knowledge and skills. From these insights, the researchers present recommendations for others endeavouring to engage in co-produced research. These include: recognising vulnerabilities and challenges during the early stages of a project; creating safe spaces; seeing the value of diversity; harnessing individual strengths; establishing a strong routine; and ensuring equal voice.
conclusionsThis paper presents a novel perspective on the realities of co-produced research by documenting the lived experiences of researchers within the context of foster care research. It highlights the importance of both measurable, tangible project outcomes, and the personal and skills growth of team members. The consistent use of diaries is encouraged as a valuable practice to capture learning, progress and achievements throughout the co-production process.
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.