ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Co-Producing Evidence-Based Care: Nurses' and Patients' Lived Experiences in Long-Term Condition Management.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-Producing Evidence-Based Care: Nurses' and Patients' Lived Experiences in Long-Term Condition Management.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Organisational contextual drivers of evidence-based practice across acute and primary care.BMC nursing · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore the lived experiences of nurses and patients co-producing evidence-based care for long-term conditions, and to understand how they make sense of this process within relational, emotional and organisational contexts.
designA qualitative study using the Interpretative Phenomenological Approach.
methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with 20 participants, comprising 11 registered nurses and 9 adult patients living with at least one Long-Term Condition. Participants were recruited from primary and secondary care settings across the Midlands, England. Data were collected between February and August 2023 and analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Approach's iterative and inductive framework.
resultsFive experiential themes were identified: (1) weaving together different knowledges, (2) the relational foundations of co-production, (3) organisational pressures and misalignments, (4) shifting identities and power dynamics and (5) emotional and ethical complexity in co-producing care. Participants described co-production as a deeply relational and negotiated process, shaped by trust, vulnerability and shared decision-making.
conclusionCo-producing evidence-based care in Long-Term Condition management involves more than implementing guidelines. It is a relational, emotional and contextual practice that requires shared interpretation of evidence, deep listening and responsiveness to individual lives. Findings suggest a need to reframe evidence-based practice as a co-creative process grounded in relational ethics and contextual awareness. IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings emphasise the centrality of relational competence and organisational flexibility in enabling co-produced care. Findings call for educational and policy reforms that value emotional labour, professional humility and patient knowledge as essential to evidence-based nursing. Internationally, this work provides a grounded model for integrating person-centred approaches into chronic care delivery and policy. CONTRIBUTION TO THE WIDER GLOBAL CLINICAL COMMUNITY: The study offers a relational model of evidence-based practice that moves beyond protocol-driven care to one shaped through dialogue, empathy and contextual negotiation, offering practical insights for transforming professional roles and health systems globally. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Patient representatives contributed to study design, development of interview guides and interpretation of findings to ensure alignment with lived experiences. REPORTING
methodThis study follows the SRQR guideline.
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.