ArticleFrontiers in health services2026
Building meaningful relationships through co-design: reflections from a participatory multi-year research partnership to create MedManageSCI.
Article in Frontiers in health services, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Participatory approaches to research, including co-design, are essential to enhancing healthcare quality and safety and for minimizing the research-to-practice gap. Our team co-designed a medication self-management toolkit, MedManageSCI, to empower adults with spinal cord injury/dysfunction (SCI/D) to better integrate medications into their daily lives. Objective: We reflect on the lessons learned through the co-development of MedManageSCI and provide practical considerations for future co-design and implementation research. Methods: A participatory multi-methods study was conducted to co-develop, implement, and evaluate MedManageSCI. A working group comprised of adults with SCI/D, caregivers, and healthcare providers guided all aspects of this research, participating in a total of 10 meetings over the three-year project. In the final meeting, a reflective discussion was facilitated to identify key insights, practical strategies, and future considerations for engaging a diverse group of individuals in a multi-year, participatory research process. The audio-recording and notes from this session were analyzed independently and with the working group. Results: The working group consisted of nine adults with SCI/D, nine healthcare providers (e.g., physicians, nurses, pharmacists, physical therapists, occupational therapists), and one caregiver from across Canada. We identified an overarching theme, development of meaningful relationships, which was enabled through the following three key insights: co-creating a vision and having a collaborative culture, ensuring structured and intentional engagement, and closing the loop through authentic transparency. Across the overarching theme and insights, we discuss practical strategies and future considerations to support meaningful and sustained engagement in participatory research. Conclusions: By sharing our processes and key learnings, our goal is to inform and strengthen future co-design and implementation research by promoting shared and inclusive leadership, ensuring meaningful engagement, and fostering psychologically safe environments.
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.