Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36366855›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2023

Use of co-design methodology in the development of cardiovascular disease secondary prevention interventions: A scoping review.

Jason Talevski, Stefan T Kulnik, Rebecca L Jessup, Roman Falls, Natali Cvetanovska, Alison Beauchamp

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Implementation of Stroke Prevention Intervention Make My Day in Swedish Primary Healthcare.Canadian journal of occupational therapy. Revue canadienne d'ergotherapie · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Using Codesign to Develop a Health Literacy Intervention to Improve the Accessibility and Acceptability of Cardiac Services: The Equal Hearts Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Co-Design of an Ecosystem of Services to Support Veteran Well-Being and Reduce Excessive Alcohol Consumption.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Consumer Involvement in the Design and Development of Medication Safety Interventions or Services in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jason TalevskiInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9180-8758
Stefan T KulnikLudwig Boltzmann Institute for Digital Health and Prevention, Salzburg, Austria.
Rebecca L JessupSchool of Rural Health, Monash University, Warragul, Victoria, Australia.
Roman FallsWestern Centre for Health Research and Education, Sunshine Hospital, St Albans, Victoria, Australia.
Natali CvetanovskaSchool of Rural Health, Monash University, Warragul, Victoria, Australia.
Alison BeauchampSchool of Rural Health, Monash University, Warragul, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6555-6200

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is growing evidence to support the use of co-design in developing interventions across many disciplines. This scoping review aims to examine how co-design methodology has been used in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) secondary prevention interventions within health and community settings.

methodsWe searched four academic databases for studies that used the co-design approach to develop their intervention. Studies were included if consumers (adults with CVD) and key stakeholders (e.g. clinicians, service providers) were involved in the co-design process. The review focused on methodology rather than traditional study outcomes; therefore, co-design processes and activities were extracted and evaluated against a selected co-design framework.

resultsTwenty-two studies were included in this review. Studies were implemented across various settings with consumers and stakeholder groups most frequently consisting of patients and healthcare professionals, respectively. Most studies specifically stated that they used a 'co-design' approach (n = 10); others used terms such as participatory action research (n = 3), user-centred design (n = 3) and community-based participatory research (n = 2). Although there was variability in terminology, co-design processes, and participants, all studies adhered to the key principles of consumer engagement. Predominant co-design activities included semistructured interviews, focus groups, co-design/development workshops and advisory group meetings. Intervention effectiveness was assessed in eight studies showing mixed results.

conclusionsThis review provides an overview of how the co-design approach has previously been used in the development of CVD secondary prevention interventions. These findings provide methodological considerations that can guide researchers and healthcare services when implementing co-design to develop feasible and acceptable interventions that can improve outcomes for CVD populations. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patients, service users, caregivers, people with lived experience or members of the public were involved in this scoping review. This review article was written by academics who have undertaken a significant amount of co-design work with consumers and stakeholders.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesSecondary PreventionAdultHumanscardiovascular diseaseco-designcommunity-based participatory researchconsumerssecondary preventionstakeholders

Identifiers

PMID36366855
PMCPMC9854329

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.