Kristoffer Halvorsrud|Justyna Kucharska|Katherine Adlington|K. Rüdell|Eva Brown Hajdukova|James Nazroo|Maria Haarmans|James Rhodes|Kamaldeep Bhui
Identifying evidence of effectiveness in the co-creation of research: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the international healthcare literature
Queen Mary University of London|Queen Mary University of London|University of Westminster|East London NHS Foundation Trust|Centre for Mental Health|Queen Mary University of London|Queen Mary University of London|University of Manchester|University of Manchester|University of Manchester|Queen Mary University of London
abstract background investigate address evidence gap effectiveness cocreationproduction international health research methods initial systematic search previous reviews published 22 july 2017 medline embase psycinfo scopus web science extracted reported aims elements outcomes cocreationproduction 50 reviews however reviews rarely tested effectiveness intended outcomes therefore checked reference lists 13 included systematic reviews cited quantitative studies involving publicpatients design andor implementation research projects conduct metaanalyses effectiveness using standardized mean difference smd results twentysix primary studies included showing moderate positive effects community functions smd 056 95ci 029084 n 11 small positive effects physical health smd 025 95ci 007042 n 9 healthpromoting behaviour smd 014 95ci 003026 n 11 selfefficacy smd 034 95ci 001067 n 3 health service accessreceipt smd 036 95ci 021052 n 12 nonacademic stakeholders cocreated one research stage showed significantly favourable mental health outcomes however cocreation rarely extended later stages evaluationdissemination studies specifically ethnic minority groups conclusions cocreation research may improve several healthrelated outcomes public health broadly research lacking longer term effects