There is no author summary for this book yet. Authors can add summaries to their books on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Background Billions of dollars are lost annually in health research that fails to create meaningful benefits for patients. Engaging in research co-design – the meaningful involvement of end-users in research – may help address this research waste. This rapid overview of reviews addressed three related questions, namely (1) what approaches to research co-design exist in health settings? (2) What activities do these research co-design approaches involve? (3) What do we know about the effectiveness of existing research co-design approaches? The review focused on the study planning phase of research, defined as the point up to which the research question and study design are finalised. Methods Reviews of research co-design were systematically identified using a rapid overview of reviews approach (PROSPERO: CRD42019123034). The search strategy encompassed three academic databases, three grey literature databases, and a hand-search of the journal Research Involvement and Engagement. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening and data extraction and resolved disagreements through discussion. Disputes were resolved through discussion with a senior author (PB). One reviewer performed quality assessment. The results were narratively synthesised. Results A total of 26 records (reporting on 23 reviews) met the inclusion criteria. Reviews varied widely in their application of ‘research co-design’ and their application contexts, scope and theoretical foci. The research co-design approaches identified involved interactions with end-users outside of study planning, such as recruitment and dissemination. Activities involved in research co-design included focus groups, interviews and surveys. The effectiveness of research co-design has rarely been evaluated empirically or experimentally; however, qualitative exploration has described the positive and negative outcomes associated with co-design. The research provided many recommendations for conducting research co-design, including training participating end-users in research skills, having regular communication between researchers and end-users, setting clear end-user expectations, and assigning set roles to all parties involved in co-design. Conclusions Research co-design appears to be widely used but seldom described or evaluated in detail. Though it has rarely been tested empirically or experimentally, existing research suggests that it can benefit researchers, practitioners, research processes and research outcomes. Realising the potential of research co-design may require the development of clearer and more consistent terminology, better reporting of the activities involved and better evaluation.
Abstract Background This study examined the incidence of a person’s first diagnosis of a selected chronic disease, and the relationships between modifiable lifestyle risk factors and age to first of six chronic diseases. Methods Ontario respondents from 2001 to 2010 of the Canadian Community Health Survey were followed up with administrative data until 2014 for congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive respiratory disease, diabetes, lung cancer, myocardial infarction and stroke. By sex, the cumulative incidence function of age to first chronic disease was calculated for the six chronic diseases individually and compositely. The associations between modifiable lifestyle risk factors (alcohol, body mass index, smoking, diet, physical inactivity) and age to first chronic disease were estimated using cause-specific Cox proportional hazards models and Fine-Gray competing risk models. Results Diabetes was the most common disease. By age 70.5 years (2015 world life expectancy), 50.9% of females and 58.1% of males had at least one disease and few had a death free of the selected diseases (3.4% females; 5.4% males). Of the lifestyle factors, heavy smoking had the strongest association with the risk of experiencing at least one chronic disease (cause-specific hazard ratio = 3.86; 95% confidence interval = 3.46, 4.31). The lifestyle factors were modelled for each disease separately, and the associations varied by chronic disease and sex. Conclusions We found that most individuals will have at least one of the six chronic diseases before dying. This study provides a novel approach using competing risk methods to examine the incidence of chronic diseases relative to the life course and how their incidences are associated with lifestyle behaviours.
‘Codesign’ and associated terms such as ‘coproduction’ or ‘patient engagement’, are increasingly common in the health research literature, due to an increased emphasis on the importance of ensuring that research related to service/systems development is meaningful to end-users. However, there continues to be a lack of clarity regarding the key principles and practices of codesign, and wide variation in the extent to which service users are meaningfully engaged in the process. These issues are particularly acute when end-users include populations who have significant health and healthcare disparities that are linked to a range of intersecting vulnerabilities (eg, poverty, language barriers, age, disability, minority status, stigmatised conditions). The purpose of this paper is to prompt critical reflection on the nature of codesign research with vulnerable populations, including key issues to consider in the initial planning phases, the implementation process, and final outputs. Risks and tensions will be identified in each phase of the process, followed by a tool to foster reflexivity in codesign processes to address these issues.
