Co-creation experiences among adults in diverse contexts: A Health CASCADE scoping review
Public Health, ISSN: 0033-3506, Vol: 238, Page: 29-36
2025
- 1Citations
- 10Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
This scoping review aimed to summarise available evidence relating to co-creation experiences among adults in diverse contexts. Understanding how participation in co-creation processes shapes experiences is important as it can offer insights into the improved development and effective use of such processes. Co-creation has increasingly gained attention due to its many claimed advantages and benefits to participants. There is however a lack of aggregated literature on stakeholders’ experience of the co-creation process. Scoping review. Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews was used. A systematic search was conducted in Scopus and the Health CASCADE Co-creation Database (an open access curated database of 13,501 articles, screened for inclusion based on criteria relating to co-creation participatory research). Themes were generated through thematic analysis. We included 80 publications. Positive co-creation experiences were linked to establishing interpersonal relationships and positive group dynamics, enhanced well-being, personal development, satisfaction and fulfilment. Negative experiences were associated with initial uncertainties, project-related challenges, interpersonal issues, dissatisfaction, and disengagement. This review offers insights into how co-creation shaped experiences and demonstrates the scope and characteristics of co-creation experiences. It highlights the need for further research, particularly in understanding the mechanisms underpinning and explaining experiences and in strategies for promoting positive experiences and mitigating negative experiences.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0033350624004591; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2024.11.002; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85209710221&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39580984; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0033350624004591
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know