Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42850667›Full record

ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026

"Co-production is catnip to my brain. I need it and I would be in care otherwise": a call for action for researchers to safeguard the integrity of co-production in dementia research.

Laiba Ahmad, Martin Robertson, Ronald Amanze Ferguson, Eleanor Robinson-Carter

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Laiba AhmadGeller Institute of Ageing and Memory (GIAM), University of West London, St Mary's Rd, London, W5 5RF, UK.
Martin Robertson, Aberdeen, UK.
Ronald Amanze Ferguson, London, UK.
Eleanor Robinson-CarterSocial Work and Psychology, University of Hull, Cottingham Rd, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK. E.Robinson-Carter@hull.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn dementia research, co-production is a key mechanism for embedding the perspectives of those with lived experience into decision-making. However, despite its potential, its meaning and application remain inconsistent as co-production can often be limited to a single phase of a research study or tokenistic involvement. Co-authored by two people living with dementia and two researchers, this comment piece examines the evolution of co-production, its underpinning principles, and the challenges that threaten its integrity. Central to this work is a definition co-developed within the EMPOWER Dementia Network+, in collaboration with lived experts, researchers, and community partners. This definition foregrounds equity, shared power, and shared responsibility, and advocates for the sustained involvement of diverse stakeholders from project inception through to completion. MAIN TEXT: Utilising co-production resources and models to highlight the key aspects of co-production, this call for action underscores the areas in co-production which need attention and reform by researchers. Through a narrative exploration of the co-production journey, from visioning and planning to delivery and outcomes, the paper identifies key elements that make co-production meaningful in both research and practice. These include embedding co-production throughout the research cycle, ensuring safe and equitable spaces, prioritising diversity and inclusion. Challenges include digital and geographical exclusion, language barriers, lack of training, and limited resources. The paper distinguishes between in-person, online, and hybrid delivery, highlighting how each setting influences engagement and outcomes. Real-world examples illustrate how these principles and barriers play out in practice, including direct quotes from the authors as experts by experience to capture their personal viewpoints.

conclusionThe comment piece offers a practical framework for embedding co-production meaningfully across research phases, supported by examples that demonstrate its transformative potential. It includes a set of recommendations to ensure power and responsibility are equally shared amongst participants. It positions our new, co-produced toolkit for lived experts, researchers, and practitioners to guide the planning, delivery, and evaluation of a research project. The toolkit has the potential to strengthen the integrity and use of co-production with people living with dementia, reduce tokenistic practices, and improve the relevance and impact of dementia research.

Indexed as

Best practiceCo-productionDementiaLived experiencePatient involvementPublic engagementResearch

Identifiers

PMID42850667
PMCPMC13647524

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.