Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39516889›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2024

Bridging the gap: reflections on co-creation in knowledge translation.

Marjolijn Ketelaar, Maureen Bult, Marike Willems-Op Het Veld, Karen van Meeteren, Marij Roebroeck, Jeanine Voorman

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Marjolijn KetelaarDe Hoogstraat Rehabilitation, Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, Utrecht, The Netherlands. M.Ketelaar@dehoogstraat.nl.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8324-518X
Maureen BultDe Hoogstraat Rehabilitation, Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9256-5161
Marike Willems-Op Het VeldPatient Association for People Living with Cerebral Palsy, CP Nederland (Cerebral Palsy Netherlands), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Karen van MeeterenParent of a Child with Cerebral Palsy, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9958-2569
Marij RoebroeckPERRIN Consortium, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2030-7232
Jeanine VoormanDe Hoogstraat Rehabilitation, Center of Excellence for Rehabilitation Medicine, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-0290-8889

Funding

SKMS Z69044781
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo address the research-practice gap, knowledge translation is a crucial step in which co-creation, including patient and public involvement (PPI), is key. We performed a knowledge translation project in co-creation with all stakeholders as equal partners in the design and decision-making process. The project was based on scientific knowledge of a large research program on development of children and young adults with cerebral palsy (CP). It aimed to synthesize the knowledge on development of children and youth with CP, and to develop tools that are useful for health care professionals, persons with CP, and families. This paper describes the knowledge translation process applied in the project, specifically how the 'key principles' employed to ensure co-creation were operationalised, including reflections on the process and lessons learned. MAIN BODY: Three key principles were defined to guarantee involvement of all stakeholders as equal partners in the design and decision-making process: a shared vision on collaboration and partnership, transparency: open and honest communication, and co-creation as a stepwise, iterative process. These key principles are based on literature and earlier experiences. They are described in more detail and are illustrated with examples from the knowledge translation project. The iterative co-creation process can be regarded as a cyclical process, including planning, conducting, reflection, evaluation, and refining the product and the process. This means that there was a continuous learning cycle in which we learned from the challenges and successes, now and then taking a step back. Based on our reflections the most important lessons learned are summarized.

conclusionThe key principles were helpful in this knowledge translation process. Reflecting on these principles during the joint journey secured co-creation with all stakeholders as equal partners in the design and decision-making process. By sharing experiences, key principles, examples and lessons learned we intend to advance knowledge in PPI, and to inspire others.

Indexed as

Cerebral palsyCo-creationExperts by experienceHealth care professionalsKnowledge translationPPI

Identifiers

PMID39516889
PMCPMC11549806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.