Back

Partnership-focussed Principles-driven Online co-Design (P-POD): a mixed-methods evaluation of a novel online co-design process.

Coulston, F.; Spittle, A.; McDonald, C.; Toovey, R.; Cameron, K.; Attard, K.; Binstock, L.; Fletcher, I.; Delaney, A.; Murphy, T.; Keating, C.; Sellick, K.

2023-06-03 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.1101/2023.05.25.23290507 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeCo-design involves stakeholders in designing rehabilitation interventions that impact their health (end-users) or professional lives (clinicians and researchers). Partnership-focussed Principles-driven Online co-Design (P-POD) is proposed and evaluated as an authentic approach to adapting research co-design into an online environment. Materials and methodsA community-based participatory research approach scaffolded the co-design process and convergent mixed-methods evaluation. P-POD involved 10 stakeholders (parents, clinicians, coaches, and researchers) in eight 90-minute workshops to co-design a circus-based rehabilitation intervention to improve participation for preschool-aged children born preterm (premmies). P-POD was evaluated via anonymous surveys during workshops and semi-structured interviews upon completion of the process. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and reflexive thematic analysis. ResultsThe resulting co-designed intervention is "CirqAll: preschool circus for premmies". Evaluation of P-POD indicated adherence to guiding principles of stakeholder involvement and co-design. Themes describe participants experiences of the supportive online culture, room for healthy debate, power-sharing, and multiple definitions of success. ConclusionsP-POD appears to provide an authentic transition of research co-design into an online environment. P-POD was successfully used with stakeholders to produce a paediatric rehabilitation intervention, and benefits from the online approach align with, and extend on, those reported in the literature on in-person co-design approaches.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.