More than a method: trusting relationships, productive tensions, and two-way learning as mechanisms of authentic co-production

• Main Authors: Sarah E. Knowles, Dawn Allen, Ailsa Donnelly, Jackie Flynn, Kay Gallacher, Annmarie Lewis, Grace McCorkle, Manoj Mistry, Pat Walkington, Jess Drinkwater
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2021-05-01
• Series: Research Involvement and Engagement
• Subjects: Co-production; Co-design; Participatory methods; Knowledge mobilisation; Patient involvement; Patient engagement
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00262-5

Plain English summary We conducted a study exploring how patients could be involved in improving services using health data. This paper reports on the evaluation of that study. We collected different kinds of feedback throughout, including a survey of impacts on contributors, a focus group to reflect on what worked well and what could be done better, and also sharing thoughts throughout the study itself. We analysed this feedback together, to make sure that both contributor and researcher perspectives were considered equally. We found that the successful co-production that happened during the study was the result of having ‘space to talk’ and ‘space to change’. Space to talk that meant we all shared our views and recognised each other as experts bringing equally important knowledge. Space to change meant that we acted on the knowledge shared, to change both the study and to change how we worked together. We found that these themes occurred at multiple levels. They were partly achieved by the specific participatory codesign methods that were used, but equally or perhaps more important was the trusting relationship between the researcher and contributors, including openness to explore tensions. The wider systems that supported involvement, in this case the financial reimbursement for contributor time, were also as important to this as the things that happened within the study itself. We recommend that future work creates ‘space to talk’ and ‘space to change’, and reports openly on how both contributors and researchers are affected by this.