• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

基于证据的、经验为基础的共同设计:一种将研究证据和生活经验整合到卫生服务优先事项设定和共同设计中的新框架。

Evidence-informed, experience-based co-design: a novel framework integrating research evidence and lived experience in priority-setting and co-design of health services.

机构信息

Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2024 Aug 8;14(8):e084620. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084620.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084620
PMID:39122385
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11404138/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To describe a new co-design framework termed Evidence-informed, Experience-based Co-design (E2CD).

BACKGROUND

Involving consumers and clinicians in planning, designing and implementing services results in the end-product being more likely to meet the needs of end-users and increases the likelihood of their uptake and sustainability. Different forms and definitions of co-design have been described in the literature and have had varying levels of success in health service redesign. However, many fall short of including people with lived experience in all aspects of the process, particularly in setting priorities for service (re)design. In addition, health services need to deliver evidence-based care as well as care that meets the needs of users, yet few ways of integrating research evidence into co-design processes are described. This paper describes a new framework to approach co-design which addresses these issues. We believe that it offers a roadmap to address some of healthcare's most wicked problems and potentially improve outcomes for some of the most vulnerable people in our society. We use improving services for people with high healthcare service utilisation as a working example of the Framework's application.

CONCLUSION

Evidence-informed experience-based co-design has the potential to be used as a framework for co-design that integrates research evidence with lived experience and provides people with lived experience a central role in decision-making about prioritising and designing services to meet their needs.

摘要

目的

描述一种新的联合设计框架,称为基于证据的经验联合设计(E2CD)。

背景

让消费者和临床医生参与服务的规划、设计和实施,可使最终产品更有可能满足最终用户的需求,并增加其采用和可持续性的可能性。文献中已经描述了不同形式和定义的联合设计,并且在卫生服务重新设计方面取得了不同程度的成功。然而,许多设计都没有让有实际经验的人参与到过程的各个方面,特别是在为服务(重新)设计确定优先级方面。此外,卫生服务需要提供基于证据的护理以及满足用户需求的护理,但很少有将研究证据纳入联合设计过程的方法。本文描述了一种新的联合设计框架来解决这些问题。我们相信,它为解决一些医疗保健中最棘手的问题提供了一个路线图,并有可能改善我们社会中一些最弱势群体的结果。我们以提高高医疗服务利用率人群的服务为工作示例,应用该框架。

结论

基于证据的经验联合设计有可能被用作联合设计的框架,将研究证据与实际经验相结合,并使有实际经验的人在确定和设计满足其需求的服务优先级方面发挥核心作用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80b6/11404138/719ae9bb990b/bmjopen-14-8-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80b6/11404138/dee690887755/bmjopen-14-8-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80b6/11404138/719ae9bb990b/bmjopen-14-8-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80b6/11404138/dee690887755/bmjopen-14-8-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/80b6/11404138/719ae9bb990b/bmjopen-14-8-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Evidence-informed, experience-based co-design: a novel framework integrating research evidence and lived experience in priority-setting and co-design of health services.基于证据的、经验为基础的共同设计:一种将研究证据和生活经验整合到卫生服务优先事项设定和共同设计中的新框架。
BMJ Open. 2024 Aug 8;14(8):e084620. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-084620.
2
Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.消费者和医疗服务提供者合作对卫生服务规划、提供和评估的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Sep 15;9(9):CD013373. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013373.pub2.
3
Understanding and using experiences of social care to guide service improvements: translating a co-design approach from health to social care.理解和利用社会关怀经验指导服务改进:将共同设计方法从卫生领域转化到社会关怀领域。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Aug;12(27):1-84. doi: 10.3310/MYHT8970.
4
Consumers' and health providers' views and perceptions of partnering to improve health services design, delivery and evaluation: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis.消费者和卫生服务提供者对合作改善卫生服务设计、提供和评估的看法和认知:一项共同制定的定性证据综合研究。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 14;3(3):CD013274. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013274.pub2.
5
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
6
Service innovations for people with multiple long-term conditions: reflections of a rapid evaluation team.针对患有多种慢性病患者的服务创新:一个快速评估团队的思考
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Jun;12(15):1-76. doi: 10.3310/PTRU7108.
7
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.考克兰新生儿协作网的未来。
Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12.
8
Trauma-informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs.创伤知情共同生产:合作与专业知识相结合,改善有复杂需求的女性获得初级保健的途径。
Health Expect. 2023 Oct;26(5):1895-1914. doi: 10.1111/hex.13795. Epub 2023 Jul 10.
9
Cancer in English prisons: a mixed-methods study of diagnosis, treatment, care costs and patient and staff experiences.英国监狱中的癌症:一项关于诊断、治疗、护理成本以及患者和工作人员经历的混合方法研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Feb;13(3):1-51. doi: 10.3310/HYRT9622.
10
Identifying health and healthcare priorities in rural areas: A concept mapping study informed by consumers, health professionals and researchers.确定农村地区的健康和医疗保健重点:基于消费者、卫生专业人员和研究人员的概念映射研究。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Aug 13;22(1):105. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01163-1.

引用本文的文献

1
Banking on My Voice: Life with Motor Neurone Disease.依靠我的声音:与运动神经元病相伴的生活
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Jul 21;13(14):1770. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13141770.
2
Enhancing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research trial leadership and participation: insights from the initial stages of the Australian Fans in Training Project in the Northern Territory of Australia.加强原住民和托雷斯海峡岛民在研究试验中的领导力与参与度:来自澳大利亚北领地“球迷训练项目”初始阶段的见解
BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 18;15(7):e095720. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-095720.
3
Transforming Community-Based Rehabilitation Services: A National Redesign Using Experience-Based Co-Design.

本文引用的文献

1
The use of co-production, co-design and co-creation to mobilise knowledge in the management of health conditions: a systematic review.利用共同生产、共同设计和共同创作来调动健康状况管理中的知识:系统评价。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Jul 7;22(1):877. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08079-y.
2
Strengths and risks of the Primary Health Network commissioning model.初级卫生保健网络委托模式的优势与风险。
Aust Health Rev. 2022 Oct;46(5):586-594. doi: 10.1071/AH21356.
3
Mapping definitions of co-production and co-design in health and social care: A systematic scoping review providing lessons for the future.
转变基于社区的康复服务:基于体验式共同设计的全国性重新设计
Health Expect. 2025 Jun;28(3):e70330. doi: 10.1111/hex.70330.
4
Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Reliability and Validity Studies of the Chinese Version of the Evidence-Based Practice and Evidence-Informed Practice Questionnaire.《循证实践与循证 informed 实践问卷中文版的翻译、跨文化调适及信效度研究》
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2025 May 12;18:2661-2679. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S518183. eCollection 2025.
5
Codeveloping an Online Resource for People Bereaved by Suicide: Mixed Methods User-Centered Study.为自杀丧亲者共同开发在线资源:以用户为中心的混合方法研究。
JMIR Ment Health. 2025 Jan 20;12:e56945. doi: 10.2196/56945.
绘制健康和社会关怀领域中共同生产和共同设计的定义:为未来提供经验教训的系统范围界定综述。
Health Expect. 2022 Jun;25(3):902-913. doi: 10.1111/hex.13470. Epub 2022 Mar 23.
4
Consumer engagement in health care policy, research and services: A systematic review and meta-analysis of methods and effects.消费者参与医疗政策、研究和服务:方法和效果的系统评价和荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2022 Jan 27;17(1):e0261808. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261808. eCollection 2022.
5
Is Co-production Just a Pipe Dream for Applied Health Research Commissioning? An Exploratory Literature Review.联合生产对于应用健康研究委托而言只是一个白日梦吗?一项探索性文献综述。
Front Sociol. 2019 Jun 24;4:50. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2019.00050. eCollection 2019.
6
A generative co-design framework for healthcare innovation: development and application of an end-user engagement framework.一种用于医疗保健创新的生成式协同设计框架:终端用户参与框架的开发与应用
Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Mar 1;7(1):12. doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00252-7.
7
Impact of an Emergency Department-to-Home Transitional Care Intervention on Health Service Use in Medicare Beneficiaries: A Mixed Methods Study.急诊科到家庭过渡性护理干预对 Medicare 受益人的卫生服务利用的影响:一项混合方法研究。
Med Care. 2021 Jan;59(1):29-37. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0000000000001452.
8
A systematic review of intensive outpatient care programs for high-need, high-cost patients.高需求、高费用患者强化门诊护理项目的系统评价
Transl Behav Med. 2020 Oct 12;10(5):1187-1199. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibaa017.
9
Patients' perceptions of frequent hospital admissions: a qualitative interview study with older people above 65 years of age.患者对频繁住院的看法:一项对 65 岁以上老年人的定性访谈研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Sep 7;20(1):332. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01748-9.
10
Defining and Characterizing Frequent Attenders: Systematic Literature Review and Recommendations.定义和描述频繁就诊者:系统文献综述与建议
J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2020 Jul 27;7(3):255-264. doi: 10.17294/2330-0698.1747. eCollection 2020 Summer.