Scoping review protocol of the use of codesign methods in stroke intervention development

被引:2
|
作者
Singh, Hardeep [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Nelson, Michelle L. A. [4 ,5 ]
Martyniuk, Julia [6 ]
Colquhoun, Heather [1 ,3 ]
Munce, Sarah [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Cameron, Jill, I [1 ,3 ]
Kokorelias, Kristina Marie [7 ]
Pakkal, Oya [4 ]
Kuluski, Kerry [5 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Toronto, Temerty Fac Med, Dept Occupat Sci & Occupat Therapy, Toronto, ON, Canada
[2] Toronto Rehabil Inst, KITE, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Rehabil Sci Inst, Temerty Fac Med, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] Lunenfeld Tanenbaum Res Inst, Bridgepoint Collaboratory Res & Innovat, Sinai Hlth Syst, Toronto, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON, Canada
[6] Univ Toronto, Gerstein Sci Informat Ctr, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] Univ Hlth Network, Dept Med, Geriatr Med, Sinai Hlth Syst, Toronto, ON, Canada
[8] Trillium Hlth Partners, Inst Better Hlth, Mississauga, ON, Canada
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2022年 / 12卷 / 11期
关键词
Stroke; STROKE MEDICINE; EDUCATION & TRAINING (see Medical Education & Training); Protocols & guidelines; CO-DESIGN; INVOLVEMENT; DISABILITY; PATIENT; PEOPLE; HEALTH; CARE;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065150
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
IntroductionCodesign is an emerging research method to enhance intervention development by actively engaging non-researchers (eg, people who have had a stroke, caregivers and clinicians) in research. The involvement of non-researchers in research is becoming increasingly popular within health studies as it may produce more relevant and effective findings. The stroke population commonly exhibits challenges such as aphasia and cognitive changes that may limit their participation in codesign. However, the use of codesign within the stroke literature has not been comprehensively reviewed. This scoping review will determine: (1) what is the extent, range and nature of stroke research that has used codesign methods? (2) What codesign methods have been used to develop stroke interventions? (3) What considerations for codesigning interventions with people who have stroke are not captured in the findings?Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a scoping review to identify the literature relating to stroke, and codesign will be conducted on OVID Medline, OVID Embase, OVID PsychINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, PEDro-Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Global Index Medicus. Studies of any design and publication date will be included. Title and abstract and full-text review will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted, collated and then summarised descriptively using quantitative (eg, numerical descriptions) and qualitative (eg, textual descriptions) methods. Numerical summaries will map the extent (eg, number of studies), range (eg, types of studies) and nature (eg, types of interventions developed) of the literature on this topic. A thematic analysis will provide insights into the codesign methods (eg, activities, non-researchers), including heterogeneity across and within studies.Ethics and disseminationThis review protocol does not require ethics approval as data has not been collected/analysed. The findings will highlight opportunities and recommendations to inform future codesign research in stroke and other populations who exhibit similar challenges/disabilities, and they will be disseminated via publications, presentations and stakeholder meetings.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] The use of digital stories as a health promotion intervention: a scoping review
    Abby M. Lohr
    Jhenitza P. Raygoza Tapia
    Elizabeth Salerno Valdez
    Leslie C. Hassett
    Aline C. Gubrium
    Alice Fiddian-Green
    Linda Larkey
    Irene G. Sia
    Mark L. Wieland
    BMC Public Health, 22
  • [42] The use of digital stories as a health promotion intervention: a scoping review
    Lohr, Abby M.
    Tapia, Jhenitza P. Raygoza
    Valdez, Elizabeth Salerno
    Hassett, Leslie C.
    Gubrium, Aline C.
    Fiddian-Green, Alice
    Larkey, Linda
    Sia, Irene G.
    Wieland, Mark L.
    BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [43] Professional learning and development of postdoctoral scholars: a scoping review protocol
    Lorelli Nowell
    K. Alix Hayden
    Carol Berenson
    Natasha Kenny
    Nancy Chick
    Carolyn Emery
    Systematic Reviews, 7
  • [44] Professional learning and development of postdoctoral scholars: a scoping review protocol
    Nowell, Lorelli
    Hayden, K. Alix
    Berenson, Carol
    Kenny, Natasha
    Chick, Nancy
    Emery, Carolyn
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2018, 7
  • [45] Clinical manifestations and diagnostic methods in pulmonary angiosarcoma: protocol for a scoping review
    Rachel Lim
    Lea Harper
    John Swiston
    Systematic Reviews, 6
  • [46] Decolonization in Sexual and Reproductive Health Research Methods: Protocol for a Scoping Review
    Stevens-Uninsky, Maya
    Barkhad, Aisha
    MacDonald, Tonya
    Perez, Alexander
    Mbuagbaw, Lawrence
    JMIR RESEARCH PROTOCOLS, 2023, 12
  • [47] Methods for developing quality indicators for evidence implementation: a scoping review protocol
    McArthur, Alexa
    Munn, Zachary
    Lizarondo, Lucylynn
    JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS, 2023, 21 (03) : 601 - 608
  • [48] Methods to assess ambivalence toward food and diet: a scoping review protocol
    Hayashi Neto, Daisuke
    Carvalho, Samantha D. L.
    Ribeiro, Paula A. B.
    Lavoie, Kim L.
    Bacon, Simon L.
    Cornelio, Marilia E.
    JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS, 2022, 20 (04) : 1142 - 1149
  • [49] Methods for the Clinical Validation of Digital Endpoints: Protocol for a Scoping Review Abstract
    Rego, Silvia
    Henriques, Ana Rita
    Serra, Sofia Silverio
    Costa, Teresa
    Rodrigues, Ana Maria
    Nunes, Francisco
    JMIR RESEARCH PROTOCOLS, 2023, 12
  • [50] Tracheostomy decannulation methods and procedures in adults: a systematic scoping review protocol
    Kutsukutsa, John
    Mashamba-Thompson, Tivani Phosa
    Saman, Yougan
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, 6