Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39953479›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2025

Exploring co-adaptation for public health interventions: insights from a rapid review and interviews.

Janneke de Boer, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Lea Rahel Delfmann, Laura Shanna Belmon, Mira Vogelsang, Oritseweyinmi Erikowa-Orighoye, Qingfan An, Benedicte Deforche, Greet Cardon, Maïté Verloigne and 2 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Examining Stroke Symptom Messages Implemented Globally: A Need for Contextually Relevant Stroke Symptom Messaging.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

12 authors.

Janneke de Boer *Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Ghent, 9000, Belgium.
Giuliana Raffaella Longworth *Faculty of Psychology, Education and Sport Sciences, FPCEE Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon Llull, Carrer del Cister, 34, Sarrià-Sant Gervasi, Barcelona, 08022, Spain.
Lea Rahel Delfmann *Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Ghent, 9000, Belgium. lea.delfmann@ugent.be.
Laura Shanna BelmonDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, 1081 HV, the Netherlands.
Mira VogelsangSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow, G4 0BA, Scotland, U.K.
Oritseweyinmi Erikowa-OrighoyeNewcastle University, NE1 7RU, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Qingfan AnDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Benedicte DeforcheDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Ghent, 9000, Belgium.
Greet CardonDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Watersportlaan 2, Ghent, 9000, Belgium.
Maïté VerloigneDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Ghent, 9000, Belgium.
Teatske AltenburgDepartment of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, 1081 HV, the Netherlands.
Maria Giné-GarrigaFaculty of Psychology, Education and Sport Sciences, FPCEE Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon Llull, Carrer del Cister, 34, Sarrià-Sant Gervasi, Barcelona, 08022, Spain.

Funding

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme 956501
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdapting co-creation research processes and/or public health interventions improves the fit between the intervention and population of interest, potentially resulting in more relevant and effective interventions. Mode 2 research approaches (e.g., co-creation, co-production, co-design, community-based participatory research, and participatory action research) can ensure that adaptations fit the socio-cultural and economic contexts. However, an overview of existing practices and how to co-adapt is lacking. This study aimed to provide an overview of the use of co-adaptation in co-creation processes and/or public health interventions.

methodsWe conducted a rapid review search on the Health CASCADE co-creation database. Relevant peer-reviewed studies reporting on co-adaptation of public health interventions were identified. A call for case studies via social media and co-authors' snowballing was issued to perform interviews with co-creation researchers gaining insights into how co-adaptation was applied from unpublished studies and practice. Interviews were analysed using template analysis.

resultsFourteen studies addressed various public health issues by co-adapting co-creation processes, intervention activities, communication platforms, monitoring strategies, training components, and materials' language and tone. Most studies lacked detailed reporting on the co-adaptation process, though some provided information on group composition and number, duration, and methods applied. Two out of 14 studies used a framework (i.e., Intervention Mapping Adapt), seven described their adaptation procedure without naming a specific framework, and five did not report any procedures or frameworks. Five of seven case studies used adaptation frameworks (e.g., ADAPT guidance). Interviews provided insights into the co-adaptation process emphasising the importance of contextual fit, integrating prior knowledge, and logging adaptations.

conclusionsThis study is the first introducing the concept of and exploring co-adaptation of co-creation processes and/or public health interventions. It provides details regarding adaptations made, whether and which frameworks were used, and procedures applied to adapt. The findings highlight the need for tailored frameworks for co-adaptation and better reporting of co-adaptation processes.

Indexed as

Public HealthCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansInterviews as TopicCo-creationGuidelinesHealth promotionImplementationModification

Identifiers

PMID39953479
PMCPMC11827302

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.