ArticleBMJ open2026
Involving family caregivers in co-design research: a systematic review protocol for developing evidence-based engagement strategies.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStakeholder involvement in research processes is widely recommended to enhance the relevance, quality and uptake of research findings. However, existing studies highlight persistent challenges in engaging family caregivers in co-design research. This gap may result in research outcomes that fail to reflect family caregivers' needs and preferences, contradicting the core purpose of co-design. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the available evidence on family caregivers' experiences of involvement in co-design research and to generate evidence-based strategies to support effective engagement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will be conducted using a meta-aggregative approach, following the Joanna Briggs Institute's (JBI's) Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Systematic searches will be conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and PsycINFO, with no date restrictions. Preliminary searches were performed in EMBASE between September and October 2025. Qualitative primary studies that explore family caregivers' experiences of involvement in co-design research will be included. Study selection and quality appraisal will be performed independently by two researchers using predefined protocols, disagreements will be resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. After calibration, a single reviewer will extract the data using a customised data extraction template with the dataset distributed among the authors. The first author will then review all extractions. Data will be analysed following JBI's meta-aggregative method, and results will be presented in narrative summaries, tables and diagrams. The findings will inform strategies for stakeholder involvement in future co-design research. Family caregivers and co-design researchers will be involved in reviewing and revising generated recommendations to enhance their relevance and practical utility. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol does not involve human participants. The findings of this review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant scientific conferences and meetings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251229190.
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.