Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42831501›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026

Developing Best Practices in Co-Production With Lived Experience Experts in Bipolar Research: Insights From the AMBIENT-BD Lived Experience Advisory Panel.

Raahat Manrai, Amber Roguski, Amy Ferguson, Iain Campbell, Daniel J Smith, Aja L Murray, Maria Gardani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Developing Best Practices in Co-Production With Lived Experience Experts in Bipolar Research: Insights From the AMBIENT-BD Lived Experience Advisory Panel.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Raahat ManraiDivision of Psychiatry, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9126-1884
Amber RoguskiDivision of Psychiatry, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5934-7311
Amy FergusonDivision of Psychiatry, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-7406-5186
Iain CampbellDivision of Psychiatry, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8756-1326
Daniel J SmithDivision of Psychiatry, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2267-1951
Aja L MurraySchool of Psychology, Philosophy and Linguistic Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9068-3188
Maria GardaniSchool of Health in Social Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0975-5971

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 226944/Z/23/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCo-production is becoming an established methodology in mental health research, yet there remains a lack of condition-specific frameworks to guide its design and implementation. For bipolar disorder in particular, there is limited evidence on how to meaningfully engage lived experience experts in the context of possible mood instability and other impairments. This paper presents insights from a consultation with people with lived experience of bipolar disorder, aimed at developing recommendations for conducting co-production with people with bipolar.

methodsA one-off, 1-h online consultation was conducted with four members of the AMBIENT-BD Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP). The consultation used a semi-structured focus group format, guided by a topic guide, to explore strategies for recruiting and engaging co-producers in bipolar disorder research. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

resultsFour overarching themes were developed: (i) Communicating with co-producers- capturing how trusted channels and regular contact support recruitment and sustained engagement; (ii) Providing accessible information- addressing the need to balance sufficient detail with readable, low-burden formats during periods of instability; (iii) Building and sustaining trust- highlighting trust in the research process and partnerships with third-sector organisations as preconditions for meaningful involvement; and (iv) Perceived impact as a motivator- reflecting how community belonging and tangible incentives shape willingness to participate. A provisional set of practical recommendations was derived from these themes, including recruiting through trusted organisations, using non-technical language and multiple formats, offering meaningful incentives, and using low-burden communication methods during periods of unwellness.

conclusionGrounded in lived experience perspectives, this paper conceptualises co-production as a relational process in which trust, accessible communication and visible impact form the foundation for meaningful engagement with people with bipolar disorder. Positioned as a consultative contribution on the IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation, the paper offers practical, mental health-specific guidance for researchers seeking to develop advisory groups and other participatory approaches with the bipolar population. PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study has been conducted in partnership with people with lived experience of bipolar disorder. They were involved in the conceptualisation, design and data collection of the study. They helped to inform the process of conducting a co-production with people with bipolar disorder. Findings from the consultation were shared with them in a separate feedback session.

Indexed as

Advisory CommitteesBipolar DisorderFocus GroupsHumansTrustbipolar disorderconsultationco‐productionengagementlived experienceparticipation

Identifiers

PMID42831501
PMCPMC13636650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.