Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components

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 dev...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Authors: Longworth, Giuliana R., de Boer, Janneke, Goh, Kunshan, Agnello, Danielle Marie, McCaffrey, Lauren, Zapata-Restrepo, Jorge Raul, An, Qingfan, Castin, Sebastien, Davis, Aaron, Altenburg, Teatske, Verloigne, Maïté, Giné-Garriga, Maria
Format: article
Publication Date:2024
Country:España
Institution:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repository:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:20.500.14342/4425
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/4425
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014483
Access Level:Open access
Keyword:Co-creació
Salut pública
Revisió
id ES_326c4e6f6d03add2ff10e17a45ce41a1
oai_identifier_str oai:recercat.cat:20.500.14342/4425
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed componentsLongworth, Giuliana R.de Boer, JannekeGoh, KunshanAgnello, Danielle MarieMcCaffrey, LaurenZapata-Restrepo, Jorge RaulAn, QingfanCastin, SebastienDavis, AaronAltenburg, TeatskeVerloigne, MaïtéGiné-Garriga, MariaCo-creacióSalut públicaRevisióBackground 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 cocreation 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.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionBMJ JournalsUniversitat Ramon Llull. Facultat de Psicologia, Ciències de l'Educació i de l'Esport Blanquerna2024info:eu-repo/semantics/article14http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/4425https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014483reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunyainstname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)InglésAquesta versió té material suplementariBMJ Global Health 2024;9:e014483info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EU/H2020/Grant agreement No. 956501© L'autor/aAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:recercat.cat:20.500.14342/44252026-05-29T05:05:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
title Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
spellingShingle Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
Longworth, Giuliana R.
Co-creació
Salut pública
Revisió
title_short Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
title_full Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
title_fullStr Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
title_full_unstemmed Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
title_sort Navigating process evaluation in co-creation: a Health CASCADE scoping review of used frameworks and assessed components
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Longworth, Giuliana R.
de Boer, Janneke
Goh, Kunshan
Agnello, Danielle Marie
McCaffrey, Lauren
Zapata-Restrepo, Jorge Raul
An, Qingfan
Castin, Sebastien
Davis, Aaron
Altenburg, Teatske
Verloigne, Maïté
Giné-Garriga, Maria
author Longworth, Giuliana R.
author_facet Longworth, Giuliana R.
de Boer, Janneke
Goh, Kunshan
Agnello, Danielle Marie
McCaffrey, Lauren
Zapata-Restrepo, Jorge Raul
An, Qingfan
Castin, Sebastien
Davis, Aaron
Altenburg, Teatske
Verloigne, Maïté
Giné-Garriga, Maria
author_role author
author2 de Boer, Janneke
Goh, Kunshan
Agnello, Danielle Marie
McCaffrey, Lauren
Zapata-Restrepo, Jorge Raul
An, Qingfan
Castin, Sebastien
Davis, Aaron
Altenburg, Teatske
Verloigne, Maïté
Giné-Garriga, Maria
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universitat Ramon Llull. Facultat de Psicologia, Ciències de l'Educació i de l'Esport Blanquerna
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Co-creació
Salut pública
Revisió
topic Co-creació
Salut pública
Revisió
description 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 cocreation 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.
publishDate 2024
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2024
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/4425
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014483
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/4425
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014483
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Aquesta versió té material suplementari
BMJ Global Health 2024;9:e014483
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EU/H2020/Grant agreement No. 956501
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv © L'autor/a
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv © L'autor/a
Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 14
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv BMJ Journals
publisher.none.fl_str_mv BMJ Journals
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
instname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
instname_str Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
reponame_str Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
collection Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869405674592534528
score 15,811543

Similar Items