ReviewFrontiers in digital health2025
Increasing the inclusivity of digital health co-production: an integrative review.
Review in Frontiers in digital health, 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.
- Co-creation as a knowledge mobilization process in digital health regulation in East Africa: The making of the DigiReg compass.Health research policy and systems · 2026Article
- Understanding digital inclusion through the transformation of services and users: a narrative review and novel framework.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Understanding Acceptability of AI Triage Tools Amongst Underserved Populations: Lessons From the Early Phases of Co-Production With Bangladeshi Communities in Birmingham, UK.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Co-production is increasingly being used to develop sustainable improvements in health service delivery that are shaped by the experiences and needs of a diverse range of stakeholders including patients and healthcare providers. The process also offers a compelling means of fundamentally addressing the key issues of acceptability and applicability of digital health tools that contribute to ongoing inequity in the use of digital health technologies. However, creating and moderating hybrid digital health co-production teams is hindered by heightened obstacles to inclusivity and equitability of the cost and complexity of digital healthcare, and the diverse digital experience amongst the relevant stakeholders. With previous examples of co-production that involve direct interaction between developers and diverse groups of patients and staff rare, this integrative review has collated the latest evidence on engaging these diverse stakeholders in healthcare innovation, with best practice in co-production, and presents it within a framework representing the five core steps of co-production:
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.