Sze May Ng, Allan McMillan, Katie Lamb, Mark Evans, Nick Oliver, Greg Tracz, Bernadette Adeyileka-Tracz, Natalie Darko
{"title":"From insight to impact: A co-produced public engagement and dissemination strategy from the UK UNBIASED study.","authors":"Sze May Ng, Allan McMillan, Katie Lamb, Mark Evans, Nick Oliver, Greg Tracz, Bernadette Adeyileka-Tracz, Natalie Darko","doi":"10.1111/dme.70491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Persistent inequities in access to diabetes technologies remain evident among children and young people (CYP) with type 1 diabetes (T1D), particularly among those from ethnic minority groups and socioeconomically deprived areas. The UK UNBIASED study identified barriers including limited awareness, language and communication challenges, inconsistent service delivery and reduced confidence in healthcare interactions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To respond to, and support dissemination and implementation of these findings, a series of stakeholder consultation and public engagement activities was undertaken involving CYP with lived experience of diabetes, their families, diabetes healthcare professionals, diabetes networks and voluntary sector partners. These activities informed the co-production and refinement of culturally inclusive actionable recommendations, educational and dissemination resources for healthcare professionals, CYP and families, including visual materials, animation, video poem and CYP-informed communication tools. A participatory approach to public engagement was adopted to create culturally inclusive and accessible resources for healthcare professionals and CYP and families. Early evaluation drew on website analytics, social media metrics, dissemination records and informal stakeholder feedback.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Stakeholder consultation and co-production activities, informed by findings from the UNBIASED study, brought together young people, caregivers, healthcare professionals in diabetes and designers to create culturally responsive educational tools, including visual materials, infographics, youth-led videos and culturally adapted animations. These were disseminated through a strategically developed distribution plan involving local NHS services, grassroots organisations, national diabetes networks and trusted community spaces. Youth ambassadors, diabetes family networks, diabetes national networks and diabetes advocacy groups further extended the reach through social media outreach and interactive peer support sessions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Co-produced, culturally inclusive resources and targeted dissemination provide a promising starting point for improving awareness and engagement around diabetes technology equity. However, these early indicators of reach and engagement do not yet demonstrate implementation or improved uptake. Longer-term audit and evaluation are required to determine whether this approach reduces disparities in technology access and outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":520603,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","volume":" ","pages":"e70491"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.70491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Persistent inequities in access to diabetes technologies remain evident among children and young people (CYP) with type 1 diabetes (T1D), particularly among those from ethnic minority groups and socioeconomically deprived areas. The UK UNBIASED study identified barriers including limited awareness, language and communication challenges, inconsistent service delivery and reduced confidence in healthcare interactions.
Methods: To respond to, and support dissemination and implementation of these findings, a series of stakeholder consultation and public engagement activities was undertaken involving CYP with lived experience of diabetes, their families, diabetes healthcare professionals, diabetes networks and voluntary sector partners. These activities informed the co-production and refinement of culturally inclusive actionable recommendations, educational and dissemination resources for healthcare professionals, CYP and families, including visual materials, animation, video poem and CYP-informed communication tools. A participatory approach to public engagement was adopted to create culturally inclusive and accessible resources for healthcare professionals and CYP and families. Early evaluation drew on website analytics, social media metrics, dissemination records and informal stakeholder feedback.
Results: Stakeholder consultation and co-production activities, informed by findings from the UNBIASED study, brought together young people, caregivers, healthcare professionals in diabetes and designers to create culturally responsive educational tools, including visual materials, infographics, youth-led videos and culturally adapted animations. These were disseminated through a strategically developed distribution plan involving local NHS services, grassroots organisations, national diabetes networks and trusted community spaces. Youth ambassadors, diabetes family networks, diabetes national networks and diabetes advocacy groups further extended the reach through social media outreach and interactive peer support sessions.
Conclusion: Co-produced, culturally inclusive resources and targeted dissemination provide a promising starting point for improving awareness and engagement around diabetes technology equity. However, these early indicators of reach and engagement do not yet demonstrate implementation or improved uptake. Longer-term audit and evaluation are required to determine whether this approach reduces disparities in technology access and outcomes.