ArticleJournal of sleep research2025
Co-production in sleep research: A scoping review of current practices and future directions.
Article in Journal of sleep research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing Best Practices in Co-Production With Lived Experience Experts in Bipolar Research: Insights From the AMBIENT-BD Lived Experience Advisory Panel.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Community-engaged and Implementation Science-informed Pediatric Sleep Intervention Research.Current sleep medicine reports · 2026Review
- Co-production in sleep research: A scoping review of current practices and future directions.Journal of sleep 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sleep is essential for mental and physical health, and research in the field has substantially expanded over the past 50 years. Co-production methodology has been increasingly used within health and social care research, and refers to collaboration between researchers, policy makers, community partners and wider stakeholders. The aim of this scoping review was to detail the use of co-production methods within sleep research. A review of the existing literature was conducted using seven databases following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Search terms included objective and subjective sleep outcomes, and the use of co-production research methodologies. Sixteen studies were included in the final review: 10 studies used solely qualitative co-production methods to inform intervention design and development (sleep as a primary outcome [n = 5] and as a secondary outcome [n = 5]), and six studies used co-production methodologies to establish sleep as a priority outcome for future research. Most studies used consultation approaches to design interventions (n = 8), instead of using co-design teams (n = 2). Two studies focusing on intervention development recruiting participants from clinical populations with poor sleep, other studies recruited from those with other underlying conditions or a healthy population. The most common limitations of the included studies were small sample size, researcher driven topics/domains for the PAR components, under-representative samples and COVID-19 pressures. Future sleep research should consider the use of co-production methodologies from the study conceptualisation, through to the design, development and implementation of research to further benefit the intended research population.
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.