ArticleHealth psychology and behavioral medicine2025
The journey of discovery in co-creating knowledge to find a new way of working in municipal home care-seven lessons learned in a participatory appreciative action and reflection study.
Article in Health psychology and behavioral medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The study is part of a larger structural change programme, where Participatory Appreciative Action and Reflection (PAAR) has been used with the aim of changing home care practices to align with individuals' needs and goals. The purpose of this study was to describe how the knowledge process in PAAR was conducted to develop a new way of working based on the individual's needs and goals in home care. Method: A total of 160 co-researchers i.e. older persons, relatives, staff, administrators, first-line managers, case managers and persons from the authority were included in the study. Data was collected through fieldwork, including interviews, participant observations, informal conversations, focus group discussions, reference groups, and appreciative inquiry circles. Results: Co-creating knowledge was revealed as a three-step process: preparation for access to the field, being together in the field, and leaving the field. Each step describes several cycles of how the PAAR process proceeded, with actions leading to reflections and vice versa, which drove the knowledge process forward. Conclusions: The knowledge process of PAAR, gave rise to seven lessons learnt for future practice development: Contact pathways and trusting relationships, Loving struggle over time, An appreciative gaze, Patience and courage, Different ways of learning, A shared goal and Flexibility to adapt PAAR to changes in the field.
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.