ArticlePloS one2026
The role of co-design and co-creation methodologies in research supporting older adults living with HIV: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aims to synthesize existing literature on co-design and co-creation methodologies that support older adults living with HIV and to identify opportunities and challenges for applying these approaches in geriatric HIV contexts.
methodsA protocol for this scoping review was published elsewhere; we also describe our methods below. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for scoping reviews guided our approach, including database searching, title/abstract and full-text screening, data extraction, and analysis. We followed PRISMA recommendations for evidence screening and selection.
resultsOur search identified 2,734 records from databases and no articles from grey literature. Across included studies, we identified themes describing how co-design and co-creation are used with older adults living with HIV, along with persistent challenges in implementation. Co-designed digital interventions may be less accessible for older adults who have lower digital literacy or limited access to devices or internet, and participants often represent a subset of older adults who are more able to engage in workshops or interviews or who have lower health status. Advisory committee members emphasized the importance of diverse participation and attention to accessibility throughout the process.
conclusionsThis review synthesizes evidence on co-design and co-creation for older adults living with HIV and highlights implications for practice and future research participation and engagement in this population. Findings point to the need for clear processes, inclusive recruitment, and attention to digital access and support when implementing co-designed interventions in geriatric HIV care.
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.