Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMJ Glob Health ; 9(7)2024 Jul 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38964878

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Co-creation is seen as a way to ensure all relevant needs and perspectives are included and to increase its potential for beneficial effects and uptake process evaluation is crucial. However, existing process evaluation frameworks have been built on practices characterised by top-down developed and implemented interventions and may be limited in capturing essential elements of co-creation. This study aims to provide a review of studies planning and/or conducting a process evaluation of public health interventions adopting a co-creation approach and aims to derive assessed process evaluation components, used frameworks and insights into formative and/or participatory evaluation. METHODS: We searched for studies on Scopus and the Health CASCADE Co-Creation Database. Co-authors performed a concept-mapping exercise to create a set of overarching dimensions for clustering the identified process evaluation components. RESULTS: 54 studies were included. Conceptualisation of process evaluation included in studies concerned intervention implementation, outcome evaluation, mechanisms of impact, context and the co-creation process. 22 studies (40%) referenced ten existing process evaluation or evaluation frameworks and most referenced were the frameworks developed by Moore et al (14%), Saunders et al (5%), Steckler and Linnan (5%) and Nielsen and Randall (5%).38 process evaluation components were identified, with a focus on participation (48%), context (40%), the experience of co-creators (29%), impact (29%), satisfaction (25%) and fidelity (24%).13 studies (24%) conducted formative evaluation, 37 (68%) conducted summative evaluation and 2 studies (3%) conducted participatory evaluation. CONCLUSION: The broad spectrum of process evaluation components addressed in co-creation studies, covering both the evaluation of the co-creation process and the intervention implementation, highlights the need for a process evaluation tailored to co-creation studies. This work provides an overview of process evaluation components, clustered in dimensions and reflections which researchers and practitioners can use to plan a process evaluation of a co-creation process and intervention.


Asunto(s)
Salud Pública , Humanos , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Evaluación de Procesos, Atención de Salud
2.
J Med Internet Res ; 25: e45059, 2023 07 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37463024

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Co-creation is an approach that aims to democratize research and bridge the gap between research and practice, but the potential fragmentation of knowledge about co-creation has hindered progress. A comprehensive database of published literature from multidisciplinary sources can address this fragmentation through the integration of diverse perspectives, identification and dissemination of best practices, and increase clarity about co-creation. However, two considerable challenges exist. First, there is uncertainty about co-creation terminology, making it difficult to identify relevant literature. Second, the exponential growth of scientific publications has led to an overwhelming amount of literature that surpasses the human capacity for a comprehensive review. These challenges hinder progress in co-creation research and underscore the need for a novel methodology to consolidate and investigate the literature. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to synthesize knowledge about co-creation across various fields through the development and application of an artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted selection process. The ultimate goal of this database was to provide stakeholders interested in co-creation with relevant literature. METHODS: We created a novel methodology for establishing a curated database. To accommodate the variation in terminology, we used a broad definition of co-creation that encompassed the essence of existing definitions. To filter out irrelevant information, an AI-assisted selection process was used. In addition, we conducted bibliometric analyses and quality control procedures to assess content and accuracy. Overall, this approach allowed us to develop a robust and reliable database that serves as a valuable resource for stakeholders interested in co-creation. RESULTS: The final version of the database included 13,501 papers, which are indexed in Zenodo and accessible in an open-access downloadable format. The quality assessment revealed that 20.3% (140/688) of the database likely contained irrelevant material, whereas the methodology captured 91% (58/64) of the relevant literature. Participatory and variations of the term co-creation were the most frequent terms in the title and abstracts of included literature. The predominant source journals included health sciences, sustainability, environmental sciences, medical research, and health services research. CONCLUSIONS: This study produced a high-quality, open-access database about co-creation. The study demonstrates that it is possible to perform a systematic review selection process on a fragmented concept using human-AI collaboration. Our unified concept of co-creation includes the co-approaches (co-creation, co-design, and co-production), forms of participatory research, and user involvement. Our analysis of authorship, citations, and source landscape highlights the potential lack of collaboration among co-creation researchers and underscores the need for future investigation into the different research methodologies. The database provides a resource for relevant literature and can support rapid literature reviews about co-creation. It also offers clarity about the current co-creation landscape and helps to address barriers that researchers may face when seeking evidence about co-creation.


Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Investigación Biomédica , Humanos , Investigación sobre Servicios de Salud , Motivación , Proyectos de Investigación
3.
Respir Med ; 211: 107193, 2023 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36889517

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Incorporating co-creation processes may improve the quality of outcome interventions. However, there is a lack of synthesis of co-creation practices in the development of Non-Pharmacological Interventions (NPIs) for people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), that could inform future co-creation practice and research for rigorously improving the quality of care. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to examine the co-creation practice used when developing NPIs for people with COPD. METHODS: This review followed Arksey and O'Malley scoping review framework and was reported according to the PRISMA-ScR framework. The search included PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science Core Collection. Studies reporting on the process and/or analysis of applying co-creation practice in developing NPIs for people with COPD were included. RESULTS: 13 articles complied with the inclusion criteria. Limited creative methods were reported in the studies. Facilitators described in the co-creation practices included administrative preparations, diversity of stakeholders, cultural considerations, employment of creative methods, creation of an appreciative environment, and digital assistance. Challenges around the physical limitations of patients, the absence of key stakeholder opinions, a prolonged process, recruitment, and digital illiteracy of co-creators were listed. Most of the studies did not report including implementation considerations as a discussion point in their co-creation workshops. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based co-creation in COPD care is critical for guiding future practice and improving the quality of care delivered by NPIs. This review provides evidence for improving systematic and reproducible co-creation. Future research should focus on systematically planning, conducting, evaluating, and reporting co-creation practices in COPD care.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Humanos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/terapia
4.
Opt Express ; 30(25): 45748-45758, 2022 Dec 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36522973

RESUMEN

Thick volume Bragg gratings (VBG) have been used for wavefront selectivity in various applications such as data storage, endoscopy, or astronomic observation. However, a single thick grating is also selective in wavelength, severely limiting the spectral throughput of the system. Recently, our group introduced a two element Advanced Volume Holographic Filter (AVHF) where the first, dispersive Bragg grating is coupled to a thick VBG such that it dramatically improves the spectral bandwidth, and ultimately enhances the signal to noise ratio of polychromatic sources. Still, the two grating AVHF configuration introduced wavelength dispersion which prevents usage of the filter in imaging systems. Here, we present a solution to this problem by introducing a third diffraction grating that compensates for the dispersion of the two initial gratings. Using both simulation and experimental implementation of a visible-based, broadband AVHF system, the spectral dispersion was improved by a factor of up to 41 × compared to our previous system, re-collimating the output filtered beam. This new AVHF system can be utilized in imaging applications with noisy environments requiring filtration of a polychromatic source.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...