Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 5: Co-creative qualitative approaches for emerging themes in primary care research: Experience-based co-design, user-centred design and community-based participatory research

References

• Moser A, Korstjens I. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 1: introduction. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017;23(1):271–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korstjens I, Moser A. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 2: context, research questions and designs. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017;23(1):274–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moser A, Korstjens I. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: sampling, data collection and analysis. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018;24(1):9–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korstjens I, Moser A. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: trustworthiness and publishing. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018;24(1):120–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R van der K, Kasteleyn M, Meijer E, et al. SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Part 1: concepts, conditions and challenges. Eur J Gen Pract. 2019;25(4):179–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves D, Pye S, Ashcroft D, et al. The challenge of ageing populations and frail people: can primary care adapt? Br Med J. 2018;362:k3349.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cassell A, Edwards D, Harshfield A, et al. The epidemiology of multimorbidity in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2018;68(669):e245–e247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wranik WD, Price S, Haydt SM, et al. Implications of interprofessional primary care team characteristics for health services and patient health outcomes: a systematic review with narrative synthesis. Health Policy. 2019;123(6):550–563.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph-Williams N, Lloyd A, Edwards A, et al. Implementing shared decision making in the NHS: lessons from the MAGIC programme. Br Med J. 2017;357:j1744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finley N, Swartz T, Cao K, et al. How to make your research jump off the page: co-creation to broaden public engagement in medical research. PLoS Med. 2020;17(9):e1003246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janamian T, Crossland L, Wells L. On the road to value co-creation: a methodology to drive primary health care reform on the road to value co-creation in health care: the role of consumers in defining the destination, planning the journey and sharing the drive. Med J Aust. 2016;204(7):S12–S14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuipers SJ, Cramm JM, Nieboer AP. The importance of patient-centered care and co-creation of care for satisfaction with care and physical and social well-being of patients with multi-morbidity in the primary care setting. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19(1):1–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Slattery P, Saeri AK, Bragge P. Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews. Health Res Policy Sys. 2020;18(1):1–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grol R, Wensing M, Eccles M, et al. Improving patient care: the implementation of change in health care. 2nd ed. Oxford (UK): Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Coulter A, Locock L, Ziebland S, et al. Collecting data on patient experience is not enough: they must be used to improve care. Br Med J. 2014;348:1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Bate B, Roberts G. Bringing user experience to health care improvement. Oxford (UK): Radcliffe Publishing; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Knowles S, Hays R, Senra H, et al. Empowering people to help speak up about safety in primary care: using codesign to involve patients and professionals in developing new interventions for patients with multimorbidity. Health Expect. 2018;21(2):539–548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moser A, Melchior I, Veenstra M, et al. Improving the experience of older people with colorectal and breast cancer in patient-centred cancer care pathways using experience-based co-design. Health Expect. 2021;24(2):478–490.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coy K, Brock B, Pomeroy S, et al. A road less travelled: using experience based co-design to map children’s and families’ emotional journey following burn injury and identify service improvements. Burns. 2019;45(8):1848–1855.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berwick DM. Era 3 for medicine and health care. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2016;71(9):507–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, et al. Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect. 2015;18(5):1151–1166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fucile B, Bridge E, Duliban C, et al. Experience-based co-design: a method for patient and family engagement in system-level quality improvement. Patient Exp J. 2017;4(2):53–60.
   Google Scholar
• Arnstein S. A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann. 1969;35:214–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green T, Bonner A, Teleni L, et al. Use and reporting of experience-based codesign studies in the healthcare setting: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf. 2020;29(1):64–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locock L, Robert G, Boaz A, et al. Using a national archive of patient experience narratives to promote local patient-centered quality improvement: an ethnographic process evaluation of ‘accelerated’ experience-based co-design. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2014;19(4):200–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G. Using experience-based Co-design to improve the quality of healthcare: mapping where we are now and establishing future directions. London (UK): King’s College London; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Stoffers J. The promise of eHealth for primary care: opportunities for service delivery, patient-doctor communication, self-management, shared decision making and research. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018;24(1):146–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Kleij RMJJ, Kasteleyn M, Meijer E, et al. SERIES: eHealth in primary care. Eur J Gen Pract. 2019;25(4):179–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyles C, Altschuler A, Chawla N, et al. User-centered design of a tablet waiting room tool for complex patients to prioritize discussion topics for primary care visits. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4(3):e108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wachtler C, Coe A, Davidson S, et al. Development of a mobile clinical prediction tool to estimate future depression severity and guide treatment in primary care: user-centered design. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2018;6(4):e95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson S, Nieuwenhuijze M, Kane-Low L, et al. Creating guardians of physiologic birth: the development of an educational initiative for student midwives in The Netherlands. J Midwifery Womens Heal. 2019;64:642–648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bazzano A, Martin J, Hicks E, et al. Human-centred design in global health: a scoping review of applications and contexts. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0186744.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuhauser L. Integrating participatory design and health literacy to improve research and interventions. Inf Serv Use. 2017;37(2):153–176.
   Google Scholar
• Tripp SD, Bichelmeyer B. Rapid prototyping: an alternative instructional design strategy. ETR&D. 1990;38(1):31–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah SGS, Robinson I. User involvement in healthcare technology development and assessment: structured literature review. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2006;19(6):498–513.
   Google Scholar
• van Dijk-De Vries A, Stevens A, van der Weijden T, et al. How to support a co-creative research approach in order to foster impact. The development of a co-creation impact compass for healthcare researchers. PLoS One. 2020;15(10):e0240543.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosselin A, Carillon S, Coulibaly K, et al. Participatory development and pilot testing of the makasi intervention: a community-based outreach intervention to improve Sub-Saharan and Caribbean immigrants’ empowerment in sexual health. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1646.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Kock C, Schamp J, Vanderplasschen W, et al. Implementing community-based participatory research in the study of substance use and service utilisation in Eastern European and Turkish communities in Belgium. Drugs Educ Prev Policy. 2017;24(3):265–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lette M, Boorsma M, Lemmens LC, et al. Unknown makes unloved: a case study on improving integrated health and social care in The Netherlands using a participatory approach. Health Soc Care Community. 2020;28(2):670–680.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cargo M, Mercer SL. The value and challenges of participatory research: strengthening its practice. Annu Rev Public Health. 2008;29(1):325–350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacker K. Community-based participatory research. London (UK): Sage; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Israel BA, Schulz AJ, Parker EA, et al. Review of community-based research: assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19(1):173–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viswanathan M, Ammerman A, Eng E, et al. Community-based participatory research [Internet]. Evidence Based Practice Center Contract No. 290 – 02 – 0016. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2004 [cited 2021 November 17]. Available from: https://www.rti.org/publication/community-based-participatory-research-0/fulltext.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Israel BA, Eng E, Schulz AJ, et al. Methods for community-based participatory research for health. 2nd ed. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization [Internet]. Declaration of Alma Ata. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 1978 [cited 2021 November 17]. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/social-determinants-of-health/declaration-of-alma-ata
   Google Scholar
• Donnelly S, Raghallaigh MN, Foreman M. Reflections on the use of community based participatory research to affect social and political change: examples from research with refugees and older people in Ireland. Eur J Soc Work. 2019;22(5):1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korstjens I, Moser A. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 6: longitudinal qualitative and mixed-methods approaches for longitudinal and complex health themes in primary care research. Eur J Gen Pract. 2022; forthcoming.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camden C, Shikako-Thomas K, Nguyen T, et al. Engaging stakeholders in rehabilitation research: a scoping review of strategies used in partnerships and evaluation of impacts. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(15):1390–1400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstein N, Duran B, Oetzel J-G, et al. Community-based participatory action research for health. San Francisco (CA): John Wiley; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Kozinets RV. Netnography: redefined. London (UK): Sage; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Lember V, Brandsen T, Tõnurist P. The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Manag Rev. 2019;21(11):1665–1686.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar