ReviewHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025
The Role of Power in Co-Approaches to Health Research: Insights From Spain and the United Kingdom With a Rapid Review of Reviews.
Review in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCo-approaches to health research with socially excluded groups are becoming increasingly popular in the discourse of funding schemes in Spain and the United Kingdom. Such approaches aim to challenge the traditional research paradigm between researcher-participants by sharing power in knowledge production within the parameters of academic culture. This article collates the experience of six researchers working in ongoing funded health-related research projects that use co-approaches alongside racialized communities, people with learning disabilities, populations involved in the criminal justice system and people experiencing deep poverty.
methodsDrawing from the authors' collective experiences and operational questions about power, a rapid review of reviews was implemented. This review included a search within five databases from April to May 2024. Findings were analysed from the Emancipatory Power Framework (Popay et al., Health Promotion International 36, no. 5 (2021): 1253-1263) to identify, evaluate and discover insight into power dynamics that should be understood to have meaningful impact in co-approaches to health research, funding and evaluation of these initiatives.
results38 articles were included in the review. A total of eight categories emerged in the analysis linked to 'power within', 'power with', 'power to' and 'power over'.
conclusionThese findings contribute to deepening the critical discussion of co-approaches, peeling back the layers of power that define academic culture, and aligning current and future health equity research with valuation of care, Open Science and new dimensions of power such as digitalization. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION STATEMENT: This rapid review of reviews is informed by the authors' experience in co-produced research. While patients and the public were not directly involved in conducting this review, the selection and synthesis of the literature were guided by insights from prior collaborative research with diverse communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.