de Boer Janneke, Longworth Giuliana Raffaella, Delfmann Lea Rahel, Belmon Laura Shanna, Vogelsang Mira, Erikowa-Orighoye Oritseweyinmi, An Qingfan, Deforche Benedicte, Cardon Greet, Verloigne Maïté, Altenburg Teatske, Giné-Garriga Maria
Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, Ghent, 9000, Belgium.
Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Watersportlaan 2, Ghent, 9000, Belgium.
BMC Public Health. 2025 Feb 14;25(1):614. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21544-7.
Adapting co-creation research processes and/or public health interventions improves the fit between the intervention and population of interest, potentially resulting in more relevant and effective interventions. Mode 2 research approaches (e.g., co-creation, co-production, co-design, community-based participatory research, and participatory action research) can ensure that adaptations fit the socio-cultural and economic contexts. However, an overview of existing practices and how to co-adapt is lacking. This study aimed to provide an overview of the use of co-adaptation in co-creation processes and/or public health interventions.
We conducted a rapid review search on the Health CASCADE co-creation database. Relevant peer-reviewed studies reporting on co-adaptation of public health interventions were identified. A call for case studies via social media and co-authors' snowballing was issued to perform interviews with co-creation researchers gaining insights into how co-adaptation was applied from unpublished studies and practice. Interviews were analysed using template analysis.
Fourteen studies addressed various public health issues by co-adapting co-creation processes, intervention activities, communication platforms, monitoring strategies, training components, and materials' language and tone. Most studies lacked detailed reporting on the co-adaptation process, though some provided information on group composition and number, duration, and methods applied. Two out of 14 studies used a framework (i.e., Intervention Mapping Adapt), seven described their adaptation procedure without naming a specific framework, and five did not report any procedures or frameworks. Five of seven case studies used adaptation frameworks (e.g., ADAPT guidance). Interviews provided insights into the co-adaptation process emphasising the importance of contextual fit, integrating prior knowledge, and logging adaptations.
This study is the first introducing the concept of and exploring co-adaptation of co-creation processes and/or public health interventions. It provides details regarding adaptations made, whether and which frameworks were used, and procedures applied to adapt. The findings highlight the need for tailored frameworks for co-adaptation and better reporting of co-adaptation processes.
调整共创研究流程和/或公共卫生干预措施可提高干预措施与目标人群的契合度，有可能产生更具针对性和有效性的干预措施。第二代研究方法（如共创、共同生产、共同设计、基于社区的参与性研究和参与性行动研究）可确保调整措施符合社会文化和经济背景。然而，目前缺乏对现有实践以及如何进行共同调整的概述。本研究旨在概述共同调整在共创过程和/或公共卫生干预措施中的应用情况。
我们在健康共创数据库上进行了快速回顾性检索。确定了有关公共卫生干预措施共同调整的相关同行评审研究。通过社交媒体征集案例研究，并通过共同作者的滚雪球式推荐，对共创研究人员进行访谈，以深入了解未发表研究和实践中共同调整的应用方式。采用模板分析法对访谈进行分析。
14项研究通过调整共创流程、干预活动、沟通平台、监测策略、培训内容以及材料的语言和语气，解决了各种公共卫生问题。大多数研究缺乏对共同调整过程的详细报告，不过有些研究提供了关于小组组成、人数、持续时间和应用方法的信息。14项研究中有2项使用了一个框架（即干预映射调整），7项描述了其调整程序但未提及具体框架，5项未报告任何程序或框架。7个案例研究中有5个使用了调整框架（如ADAPT指南）。访谈深入了解了共同调整过程，强调了情境契合、整合先验知识和记录调整的重要性。
本研究首次引入并探索了共创过程和/或公共卫生干预措施的共同调整概念。它提供了有关所做调整、是否使用以及使用了哪些框架以及应用的调整程序的详细信息。研究结果凸显了针对共同调整制定量身定制框架以及更好地报告共同调整过程的必要性。
