ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
Co-Designing Aphasia Services: Evaluation of Involvement and Processes to Support Inclusion of People With Post Stroke Aphasia.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 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.
- Better Healthcare Together: Co-Designing a Framework for Health Service Co-Design.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Improving the Accessibility of Consumer Orientation: Co-Designing Infection Control Training for Consumers Partnering With Health Services.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- A global multilingual cocreation of aphasia priority topics through patient and public involvement.Research involvement and engagement · 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
Abstract
backgroundPeople with aphasia (PWA, impaired language/communication) are often excluded from research that concerns them due to a lack of methodological adaptations to support communication. This paper describes adaptations to support their involvement in experience-based codesign (EBCD).
aimsTo describe the involvement of PWA in EBCD and critically evaluate adaptations required to support involvement.
methodsMixed methods process evaluation and reflexive critical appraisal with PWA, significant others (SO), and speech pathologists (SP). Using surveys, stakeholders (n = 127) and a consumer advisory group (CAG; n = 6) provided feedback on involvement in five stages of the research: (1) online interviews and focus groups; (2) online surveys; (3) consensus meetings; (4) codesign workshops; and (5) the CAG. Critical reflections (lead researcher) informed the analysis. Descriptive statistics and inductive content analysis were used.
resultsMost PWA (79%) liked sharing their experiences online, and contributed as much as desired in group meetings (64%). A modified touchpoint film approach (use of voice actors, still images, and subtitles) supported reflexive discussions and collaborative understanding. All PWA and SO, and most SPs (78%) thought the touchpoint film helped them to understand experiences of care and areas for change. Long-term engagement in the project was perceived to help build relationships, reduce hierarchical power differentials and support equal sharing of ideas.
conclusionsMeaningful involvement of PWA was supported through long-term engagement, a modified touchpoint film approach, and hybrid methods of data collection. EBCD is a suitable approach for exploring experiences of care, identifying leading priorities, and co-designing areas for change with PWA. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This evaluation is informed by the reflections of the research team. This team included the consumer advisory group (public involvement team members) comprising PWA (n = 3), SOs (n = 2) and a Cultural Capability Officer. Research team members (LNA, DAC, VJP, and SJW) designed the study (including research questions, data analysis processes and assessment measures). Public involvement guided study procedures and recruitment (e.g., methods for engaging with people with lived experience of aphasia), and the interpretation and dissemination of results (e.g., co-authors on papers). A Cultural Capability Officer advised on culturally safe practices for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, are the First Nations people of Australia. Cultural Capability Officer support refers to the support provided to ensure behaviours, systems and processes are conducted in a way that is culturally respectful. Research is reported in line with the GRIPP-2 guidelines for reporting patient and public involvement.
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.