ArticleJMIR human factors2025
Impact of Bottom-Up Cocreation of Nursing Technological Innovations: Explorative Interview Study Among Hospital Nurses and Managers.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digitally supported interprofessional interaction in healthcare-a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Pooled it
- Patient and Designer Collaboration in Cocreating Technical Innovations in a Hospital-Based Makerspace: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR human factors · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn health care, the use of nursing technological innovations, particularly technological products, is rapidly increasing; however, these innovations do not always align with nursing practice. An explanation for this issue could be that nursing technological innovations are developed and implemented with a top-down approach, which could subsequently limit the positive impact on practice. Cocreation with stakeholders such as nurses can help address this issue. Nowadays, health care centers increasingly encourage stakeholder participation, which is known as a bottom-up cocreation approach. However, little is known about the experience of nurses and their managers with this approach and the innovations it results in within the field of nursing care.
objectiveThis study aims to explore nurses' and their managers' experiences with a bottom-up cocreation approach in order to assess the impact of this way of working and the resulting nursing technological innovations in an academic hospital. This insight can also inform decisions on whether the bottom-up cocreation approach should be more widely disseminated.
methodsA qualitative study using semistructured interviews was conducted with 15 participants, including cocreator nurses, end-user nurses, and their managers. First, the data were thematically analyzed. In addition, a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats analysis was conducted.
resultsThe various experiences of the participants were described in 3 main themes: enhanced attractiveness of the nursing profession, feeling involved due to a cocreation environment, and experienced benefits and challenges in using cocreated products. In addition, numerous strengths and opportunities perceived by the participants were identified as associated with the bottom-up cocreation approach and resulting useful products within nursing care; for example, cocreation contributed to job satisfaction and substantially contributed to the ease of use of the innovations that were developed.
conclusionsThe findings underscore that cocreation with nurses enhances the appeal of the nursing profession and aligns nursing technological innovations with practical nursing challenges. Embracing a culture of cocreation has the potential to foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation in nursing care.
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.