The lived experience of co-production: Reflective accounts from the InCLUDE project.
Children’s social care
Co-production
Diaries
Ethnicity
Foster care
Kinship care
Participatory research
Patient and public involvement
Reflection
Underserved
Journal
Research involvement and engagement
ISSN: 2056-7529
Titre abrégé: Res Involv Engagem
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101708164
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Oct 2024
14 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
18
06
2024
accepted:
22
09
2024
medline:
15
10
2024
pubmed:
15
10
2024
entrez:
14
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The value of co-produced research in health and social care is increasingly recognised, but accounts into the processes and individual experiences of co-producing research are lacking. This paper describes the personal journeys of four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) throughout the life course of a co-produced research project exploring the barriers and facilitators to inclusive research in foster caring, the InCLUDE project. Each researcher kept a diary throughout the InCLUDE project of their personal reflections, questions, and learning. These were synthesised and reviewed by the researchers and two colleagues external to the team, and key themes were extracted. Narratives constructed from the diaries are presented in relation to distinct aspects of the co-production journey, alongside illustrative quotes. These aspects include: motivations for starting the project; making sense of the project; defining roles and responsibilities; challenges; and reflections on acquired knowledge and skills. From these insights, the researchers present recommendations for others endeavouring to engage in co-produced research. These include: recognising vulnerabilities and challenges during the early stages of a project; creating safe spaces; seeing the value of diversity; harnessing individual strengths; establishing a strong routine; and ensuring equal voice. This paper presents a novel perspective on the realities of co-produced research by documenting the lived experiences of researchers within the context of foster care research. It highlights the importance of both measurable, tangible project outcomes, and the personal and skills growth of team members. The consistent use of diaries is encouraged as a valuable practice to capture learning, progress and achievements throughout the co-production process. Four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) reflect on their journey of being part of the InCLUDE project. InCLUDE looked at how to make research with foster and kinship carers more inclusive. Each researcher kept a diary throughout the project, to help them capture their learning, thoughts and feelings. In this paper, the diaries are collated together into themes, with illustrative quotes. These themes include motivations to get involved in the project, settling into the role, challenges, personal development, and new knowledge. The researchers then share their key learning which can help others who are hoping to co-produce a research project. This includes the importance of talking about feeling vulnerable, creating safe spaces, working to your individual strengths, setting up a strong routine, and making sure that everyone has an equal voice and role on the project. The researchers also discuss the benefits of using diaries as a way to capture learning, experiences and progress, and encourage other research teams to do the same.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The value of co-produced research in health and social care is increasingly recognised, but accounts into the processes and individual experiences of co-producing research are lacking. This paper describes the personal journeys of four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) throughout the life course of a co-produced research project exploring the barriers and facilitators to inclusive research in foster caring, the InCLUDE project.
METHODS
METHODS
Each researcher kept a diary throughout the InCLUDE project of their personal reflections, questions, and learning. These were synthesised and reviewed by the researchers and two colleagues external to the team, and key themes were extracted.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Narratives constructed from the diaries are presented in relation to distinct aspects of the co-production journey, alongside illustrative quotes. These aspects include: motivations for starting the project; making sense of the project; defining roles and responsibilities; challenges; and reflections on acquired knowledge and skills. From these insights, the researchers present recommendations for others endeavouring to engage in co-produced research. These include: recognising vulnerabilities and challenges during the early stages of a project; creating safe spaces; seeing the value of diversity; harnessing individual strengths; establishing a strong routine; and ensuring equal voice.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a novel perspective on the realities of co-produced research by documenting the lived experiences of researchers within the context of foster care research. It highlights the importance of both measurable, tangible project outcomes, and the personal and skills growth of team members. The consistent use of diaries is encouraged as a valuable practice to capture learning, progress and achievements throughout the co-production process.
Four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) reflect on their journey of being part of the InCLUDE project. InCLUDE looked at how to make research with foster and kinship carers more inclusive. Each researcher kept a diary throughout the project, to help them capture their learning, thoughts and feelings. In this paper, the diaries are collated together into themes, with illustrative quotes. These themes include motivations to get involved in the project, settling into the role, challenges, personal development, and new knowledge. The researchers then share their key learning which can help others who are hoping to co-produce a research project. This includes the importance of talking about feeling vulnerable, creating safe spaces, working to your individual strengths, setting up a strong routine, and making sure that everyone has an equal voice and role on the project. The researchers also discuss the benefits of using diaries as a way to capture learning, experiences and progress, and encourage other research teams to do the same.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) reflect on their journey of being part of the InCLUDE project. InCLUDE looked at how to make research with foster and kinship carers more inclusive. Each researcher kept a diary throughout the project, to help them capture their learning, thoughts and feelings. In this paper, the diaries are collated together into themes, with illustrative quotes. These themes include motivations to get involved in the project, settling into the role, challenges, personal development, and new knowledge. The researchers then share their key learning which can help others who are hoping to co-produce a research project. This includes the importance of talking about feeling vulnerable, creating safe spaces, working to your individual strengths, setting up a strong routine, and making sure that everyone has an equal voice and role on the project. The researchers also discuss the benefits of using diaries as a way to capture learning, experiences and progress, and encourage other research teams to do the same.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39402631
doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00639-2
pii: 10.1186/s40900-024-00639-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
104Subventions
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Organisme : NIHR Public Health Research
ID : MIDGLEY127422
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Beresford P. Public participation in health and social care: exploring the co-production of knowledge. Front Sociol. 2019;3:41.
doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2018.00041
Smith H, Budworth L, Grindey C, Hague I, Hamer N, Kislov R, Van Der Graaf P, Langley J. Co-production practice and future research priorities in United Kingdom-funded applied health research: a scoping review. Health Res Policy Syst. 2022;20:36.
doi: 10.1186/s12961-022-00838-x
pubmed: 35366898
pmcid: 8976994
Slattery P, Saeri AK, Bragge P. Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18:17.
doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-0528-9
pubmed: 32046728
pmcid: 7014755
Allen K, Needham C, Hall K, Tanner D. Participatory research meets validated outcome measures: tensions in the co-production of social care evaluation. Soc Policy Admin. 2019;53:311–25.
doi: 10.1111/spol.12468
O'Mara-Eves A, Laidlaw L, Vigurs C, Candy B, Collis A, Kneale D. The value of co-production research project: a rapid critical review of the evidence. Co-Production Collective: London, UK; 2022.
Masterson D, Areskoug Josefsson K, Robert G, Nylander E, Kjellström S. Mapping definitions of co-production and co-design in health and social care: a systematic scoping review providing lessons for the future. Health Expect. 2022;25:902–13.
doi: 10.1111/hex.13470
pubmed: 35322510
pmcid: 9122425
Hickey G, Brearley S, Coldham T, Denegri S, Green G, Staniszewska S, Tembo D, Torok K, and Turner, K. Guidance on co-producing a research project. Southampton: INVOLVE;2018.
Atkin H, Thomson L, Wood O. Co-production in research: co-researcher perspectives on its value and challenges. Br J Occup Ther. 2020;83(7):415–7.
doi: 10.1177/0308022620929542
Pettican A, Goodman B, Bryant W, Beresford P, Freeman P, Gladwell V, Kilbride C, Speed E. Doing together: reflections on facilitating the co-production of participatory action research with marginalised populations. Qual Res Sport, Exerc Health. 2022;15(2):202–19.
doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2022.2146164
Slay J, Stephens L. Co-production in mental health: a literature review. London: New Economics Foundation; 2013.
Oliver K, Kothari A, Mays N. The dark side of coproduction: do the costs outweigh the benefits for health research? Health Res Policy Syst. 2019;17:33.
doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0432-3
pubmed: 30922339
pmcid: 6437844
Williams O, Sarre S, Papoulias S C, Knowles S, Robert G, Beresford P, Rose D, Carr S, Kaur M, Palmer V J. Lost in the shadows: reflections on the dark side of co-production. Health research policy and systems.2020; 18:43.
Price A, Clarke M, Staniszewska S, Chu L, Tembo D, Kirkpatrick M, Nelken Y. Patient and public involvement in research: a journey to co-production. Patient Educ Couns. 2022;105(4):1041–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2021.07.021 .
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.07.021
pubmed: 34334264
Locock L, Boaz A. Drawing straight lines along blurred boundaries: qualitative research, patient and public involvement in medical research, co-production and co-design. Evid Policy. 2019;15(3):409–21.
doi: 10.1332/174426419X15552999451313
Liabo K, Ingold A, Roberts H. Co-production with “vulnerable” groups: balancing protection and participation. Health Sci Rep. 2018;1(3):e19.
doi: 10.1002/hsr2.19
pubmed: 30623060
Reed H, Couturiaux D, Davis M, et al. Co-production as an emerging methodology for developing school-based health interventions with students aged 11–16: systematic review of intervention types, theories and processes and thematic synthesis of stakeholders’ experiences. Prev Sci. 2021;22:475–91.
doi: 10.1007/s11121-020-01182-8
pubmed: 33237552
O'Mara-Eves A, Laidlaw L, Vigurs C, Candy B, Collis A, Kneale D. The value of co-production research project: a rapid critical review of the evidence. Co-Production Collective: London, UK;2022.
Midgley N, Irvine K, Rider B, et al. The reflective fostering programme—improving the wellbeing of children in care through a group intervention for foster carers: a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2021;22:841.
doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05739-y
pubmed: 34823552
pmcid: 8613455
Witham MD, Anderson E, Carroll C, et al. Developing a roadmap to improve trial delivery for under-served groups: results from a UK multi-stakeholder process. Trials. 2020;21:694.
doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04613-7
pubmed: 32738919
pmcid: 7395975
Fogg C, Lanning E, Shoebridge J, et al. The role of participatory action research in developing new models of healthcare: perspective from participants and recommendations for ethical review and governance oversight. Ethics Med Public Health. 2022;24:100833.
doi: 10.1016/j.jemep.2022.100833
Lloyd-Evans S, Oenga E, Zischka L, Mpofu-Coles A, Woronka R, Oveson, M, Hookway D, Cleaver M, Duval S, Karanja E, Gomma T, Neupana K, Ashcroft L, Clare S, Ma D, Sundhararanjan H, Watson P, Tatys K. Participatory Action Research: A Toolkit, University of Reading; 2023.
Stemp R, Izzidien S, Irvine K, Sharma, S Midgley, M. How inclusive and representative is research on foster caring in the UK? Findings from a scoping review. Adoption Fostering. In press.
Stemp R, Izzidien S. Square Peg in a Round Hole: A toolkit for including underserved carers in fostering services. 2023.
Snowdon M. Use of diaries in research. Nurs Stand. 2015;29(44):36–41.
doi: 10.7748/ns.29.44.36.e9251
Bovaird T, Flemig S, Loeffler E, Osborne SP. How far have we come with co-production—and what’s next? Public Money Manage. 2019;39(4):229–32.
doi: 10.1080/09540962.2019.1592903
Ortlipp M. Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process. The Qual Rep. 2008;13(4):695–705.
Meyer K, Willis R. Looking back to move forward: the value of reflexive journaling for novice researchers. J gerontol soc work. 2019;62(5):578–85.
doi: 10.1080/01634372.2018.1559906
pubmed: 30574848
Ärleskog C, Vackerberg N, Andersson AC. Balancing power in co-production: introducing a reflection model. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2021;8:108.
doi: 10.1057/s41599-021-00790-1
Finlay L. Reflecting on ‘reflective practice.’ Practice-based Professional Learning: The Open University; 2008.
Schön DA. The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing; 1991.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.
doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa