SynthesisBMJ quality & safety2026
Cocreation and codesign in maternal health: processes, outcomes and implementation challenges.
Synthesis in BMJ quality & safety, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Forty Years in the Making: Reporting on the Co-Creation of a National Roadmap for Birthing on Country Services for the Best Start to Life.The Medical journal of Australia · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe the application of cocreation/codesign in maternal health, characterise reported processes (including barriers/facilitators) and summarise clinical and experiential outcomes without inferring causal effects.
methodsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and ScienceDirect (2014-2025) identified 1487 records. After deduplication and screening, 60 studies were included in this review. The eligibility criteria encompassed qualitative and quantitative studies employing cocreation or codesign in maternal or obstetric care, with open-access English full texts. Two blinded reviewers screened the studies using Rayyan and resolved conflicts by consensus agreement. Data extraction followed the Cochrane guidelines, and a narrative synthesis was performed because of study heterogeneity. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, risk-of-bias 2 and the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomised Studies - of Exposure (ROBINS-E) tools.
resultsAcross 60 heterogeneous studies, cocreation and codesign were used to develop and adapt psychosocial support, communication and feedback interventions and digital tools such as decision-support and telemonitoring systems. Studies most often reported process and experiential outcomes, including acceptability, satisfaction, engagement and perceived relevance, to users and communities. The designs, contexts and outcome measures varied, and comparative evidence was limited. Common challenges included power imbalances, time and resource constraints, and difficulties in spreading and sustaining interventions. The reported enablers included early and ongoing stakeholder involvement, iterative cycles and attention to access barriers, including digital inclusion.
conclusionWhen cocreation and codesign are clearly described and suited to the context, they can support culturally relevant and equitable maternal care by incorporating stakeholder voices into service and intervention development. The current evidence does not support firm conclusions regarding effectiveness. Future work should transparently report codesign methods, specify the intended mechanism and context, and evaluate codesigned interventions with stronger comparative designs and longer follow-ups. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024622020.
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.