开发和验证用于方法内在评价的共同创造彩虹框架:对代表共同创造原则的模型进行健康级联结构审查。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Danielle Marie Agnello, Niamh Smith, Mira Vogelsang, Artur Steiner, Qingfan An, Janneke de Boer, Francesca Calo, Lea Delfmann, Danielle Hutcheon, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Quentin Loisel, Micaela Mazzei, Lauren McCaffrey, Jessica Renzella, Sebastien Chastin
{"title":"开发和验证用于方法内在评价的共同创造彩虹框架:对代表共同创造原则的模型进行健康级联结构审查。","authors":"Danielle Marie Agnello, Niamh Smith, Mira Vogelsang, Artur Steiner, Qingfan An, Janneke de Boer, Francesca Calo, Lea Delfmann, Danielle Hutcheon, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Quentin Loisel, Micaela Mazzei, Lauren McCaffrey, Jessica Renzella, Sebastien Chastin","doi":"10.1186/s12961-025-01381-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The growing interest in co-creation for public health innovation highlights the need for systematic approaches to stakeholder engagement. Despite its potential, co-creation faces substantial challenges, including unresolved power dynamics, poor reporting of methods and the absence of a universally agreed-upon definition. Current research reveals substantial fragmentation in co-creation literature, with limited guidance on method selection and principle alignment. This study addresses these gaps by developing a framework for systematically evaluating method alignment with key co-creation principles, offering a structured approach to fostering more effective and adaptive collaborative processes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a structured review approach based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, image-based models representing co-creation principles from academic and non-academic sources were identified and assessed. A framework was created through an iterative development process. The framework was subsequently validated by 12 geographically diverse co-creation researchers using a closed card sort method, ensuring its robustness and applicability across different research contexts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Co-Creation Rainbow Framework was developed by integrating key features from 20 included models, creating an individual-to-collective continuum with five sections (informing, understanding, stimulating, collaborating and collective decision-making), and three themes (engage, participate and empower). Successfully mapping 416 methods to the framework demonstrated its robust capability to differentiate and categorize co-creation methods, and reveaed nuanced variations in methodological strategies used by researchers and practitioners across different contexts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Co-Creation Rainbow Framework addresses the disconnect between theoretical and practical co-creation approaches through operationalising co-creation principles. By challenging traditional linear models and acknowledging the diversity of co-creation methods, the framework provides a nuanced and adaptable tool for systematically evaluating method alignment. The framework offers researchers and practitioners a robust tool for meaningful collaborative innovation, ultimately opening new pathways for collective problem-solving and knowledge generation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12870,"journal":{"name":"Health Research Policy and Systems","volume":"23 1","pages":"127"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing and validating the co-creation rainbow framework for intrinsic evaluation of methods: a health CASCADE structured review of models representing co-creation principles.\",\"authors\":\"Danielle Marie Agnello, Niamh Smith, Mira Vogelsang, Artur Steiner, Qingfan An, Janneke de Boer, Francesca Calo, Lea Delfmann, Danielle Hutcheon, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Quentin Loisel, Micaela Mazzei, Lauren McCaffrey, Jessica Renzella, Sebastien Chastin\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12961-025-01381-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The growing interest in co-creation for public health innovation highlights the need for systematic approaches to stakeholder engagement. Despite its potential, co-creation faces substantial challenges, including unresolved power dynamics, poor reporting of methods and the absence of a universally agreed-upon definition. Current research reveals substantial fragmentation in co-creation literature, with limited guidance on method selection and principle alignment. This study addresses these gaps by developing a framework for systematically evaluating method alignment with key co-creation principles, offering a structured approach to fostering more effective and adaptive collaborative processes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a structured review approach based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, image-based models representing co-creation principles from academic and non-academic sources were identified and assessed. A framework was created through an iterative development process. The framework was subsequently validated by 12 geographically diverse co-creation researchers using a closed card sort method, ensuring its robustness and applicability across different research contexts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Co-Creation Rainbow Framework was developed by integrating key features from 20 included models, creating an individual-to-collective continuum with five sections (informing, understanding, stimulating, collaborating and collective decision-making), and three themes (engage, participate and empower). Successfully mapping 416 methods to the framework demonstrated its robust capability to differentiate and categorize co-creation methods, and reveaed nuanced variations in methodological strategies used by researchers and practitioners across different contexts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Co-Creation Rainbow Framework addresses the disconnect between theoretical and practical co-creation approaches through operationalising co-creation principles. By challenging traditional linear models and acknowledging the diversity of co-creation methods, the framework provides a nuanced and adaptable tool for systematically evaluating method alignment. The framework offers researchers and practitioners a robust tool for meaningful collaborative innovation, ultimately opening new pathways for collective problem-solving and knowledge generation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12870,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"127\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Research Policy and Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-025-01381-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Research Policy and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-025-01381-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人们对共同创造公共卫生创新的兴趣日益浓厚,这凸显了对利益攸关方参与采取系统方法的必要性。尽管具有潜力,但共同创造面临着重大挑战,包括未解决的权力动态、方法报告不力以及缺乏普遍同意的定义。目前的研究表明,在共同创造文献中存在大量的碎片化,在方法选择和原则对齐方面的指导有限。本研究通过开发一个框架来系统地评估方法与关键共同创造原则的一致性,从而解决了这些差距,提供了一种结构化的方法来促进更有效和适应性更强的协作过程。方法:使用基于系统评价和元分析指南的首选报告项目的结构化评价方法,识别和评估来自学术和非学术来源的代表共同创造原则的基于图像的模型。框架是通过迭代开发过程创建的。该框架随后由12位地理上不同的共同创造研究人员使用封闭卡片排序方法进行验证,以确保其在不同研究背景下的稳健性和适用性。结果:共同创造彩虹框架是通过整合20个模型的关键特征而开发的,创建了一个个人到集体的连续体,包括五个部分(告知、理解、激励、合作和集体决策)和三个主题(参与、参与和授权)。成功地将416种方法映射到该框架中,证明了其区分和分类共同创造方法的强大能力,并揭示了研究人员和从业者在不同背景下使用的方法策略的细微差异。结论:共同创造彩虹框架通过操作共同创造原则解决了理论和实践共同创造方法之间的脱节。通过挑战传统的线性模型和承认共同创造方法的多样性,该框架为系统地评估方法一致性提供了一个细致和适应性强的工具。该框架为研究人员和实践者提供了有意义的协作创新的有力工具,最终为集体解决问题和产生知识开辟了新的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Developing and validating the co-creation rainbow framework for intrinsic evaluation of methods: a health CASCADE structured review of models representing co-creation principles.

Background: The growing interest in co-creation for public health innovation highlights the need for systematic approaches to stakeholder engagement. Despite its potential, co-creation faces substantial challenges, including unresolved power dynamics, poor reporting of methods and the absence of a universally agreed-upon definition. Current research reveals substantial fragmentation in co-creation literature, with limited guidance on method selection and principle alignment. This study addresses these gaps by developing a framework for systematically evaluating method alignment with key co-creation principles, offering a structured approach to fostering more effective and adaptive collaborative processes.

Methods: Using a structured review approach based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, image-based models representing co-creation principles from academic and non-academic sources were identified and assessed. A framework was created through an iterative development process. The framework was subsequently validated by 12 geographically diverse co-creation researchers using a closed card sort method, ensuring its robustness and applicability across different research contexts.

Results: The Co-Creation Rainbow Framework was developed by integrating key features from 20 included models, creating an individual-to-collective continuum with five sections (informing, understanding, stimulating, collaborating and collective decision-making), and three themes (engage, participate and empower). Successfully mapping 416 methods to the framework demonstrated its robust capability to differentiate and categorize co-creation methods, and reveaed nuanced variations in methodological strategies used by researchers and practitioners across different contexts.

Conclusions: The Co-Creation Rainbow Framework addresses the disconnect between theoretical and practical co-creation approaches through operationalising co-creation principles. By challenging traditional linear models and acknowledging the diversity of co-creation methods, the framework provides a nuanced and adaptable tool for systematically evaluating method alignment. The framework offers researchers and practitioners a robust tool for meaningful collaborative innovation, ultimately opening new pathways for collective problem-solving and knowledge generation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Research Policy and Systems
Health Research Policy and Systems HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
124
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Research Policy and Systems is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal that aims to provide a platform for the global research community to share their views, findings, insights and successes. Health Research Policy and Systems considers manuscripts that investigate the role of evidence-based health policy and health research systems in ensuring the efficient utilization and application of knowledge to improve health and health equity, especially in developing countries. Research is the foundation for improvements in public health. The problem is that people involved in different areas of research, together with managers and administrators in charge of research entities, do not communicate sufficiently with each other.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信