Co-produced Research Research Articles

Challenges and opportunities of sustained public involvement in maternal health research: a practice case study with reflections from researchers and public contributors

It is widely agreed that collaboration with people with lived experience of specific health conditions or health services is both a moral imperative and a utility to improve research quality, validity and impact. However, there is little agreement about how to practise public involvement. In this article, we describe the formation and work of the Nottingham Maternity Research Network, an ongoing research reference panel that supports public involvement in maternal health research. Drawing on nine years’ experience, researchers and public contributors reflect together on the key issues to consider when co-producing research with maternity service users: first, pragmatic considerations, and second, creating a safe space for drawing on intimate and sometimes traumatic experiences. We argue that a sustained model of public involvement and engagement – that is, a standing group rather than a series of project-based, time-limited opportunities for involvement – brings opportunities to build trust and to develop a community that is supportive and inclusive. However, the sustained model of public involvement also brings practical challenges.

Co-producing evidence to inform universal health coverage implementation in Ireland: 2019-2024

Abstract Background In 2017, Ireland’s parliamentary health committee published a ten-year health reform plan, entitled Sláintecare, with the aim of delivering universal healthcare. Endorsed by government in 2018, progressing Sláintecare remains government policy in 2024. In 2019, Prof Burke was awarded public funding to co-produce knowledge for the design and implementation of the regions, a key aspect of Sláintecare. In 2020, with the arrival of COVID-19, regional reform was paused and the research pivoted to capture the learning from the COVID-19 health system response to inform Sláintecare. In 2022/3, the research returned to focus on the regions. Methods Foundations’ research resulted in 14 peer-reviewed publications between 2019 and 2023. These were mixed-methods using qualitative and quantitative data and analysis. Coproduction with health system leaders that were devising and implementing the regions and the COVID-19 health system response underpinned the research. Results There are 14 academic publications from the Foundations Research (2019-2023). At the core of co-production is trust and good working relationships. Co-producing research with senior policy makers and implementers has benefits and drawbacks. The benefits include access to resources and data and that the data and knowledge generated are more likely to be adopted. Drawbacks include control over areas researched, denial of access to data and lack of openness to research findings. Producing controversial findings, unpopular with government, minister or health system leaders can also lead to difficulties for the research team. Discussion/conclusions Details of the coproduction process with senior health system and policy leaders will be presented. It will detail specific examples of the research which were initiated by the health system and those that came from the academic research team. It will give examples of how the research influenced the policy making and implementation processes. Key messages • Co-producing research between academics and health system and policy leaders leads to better use of evidence. • Trust and good workign relationships are key to co-producing research that is used in policy making and implementation processes.

Co-producing research on universal health system reform in the context of COVID-19

Abstract Issue How to co-produce and embed research into universal health system reform implementation in the context of COVID-19. In many respects the pandemic revolutionised the use of data and research, with near real-time data informing key health policy and system decisions. This was evident in the production of publicly available data sets tracking COVID-19 infection as well as health system dashboard tracking activity in real-time and influencing day-to-day decisions made. How can this use of data and research evidence become the norm for all health system reform and policy decisions? Results The Foundations’ research project is a partnership project in place since Autumn 2019. Initially focused on producing evidence to inform the design and implementation of new regional areas with the Department of Health Sláintecare Reform Office and the Irish national Health Service Executive as partners. When COVID-19 occurred all work on the regions was paused the research pivoted to harness the learnings form the COVID-19 response to inform universal health system reform. The partnership applied research nature of the programme allowed research to be coproduced and co-designed with health system leaders, meant the researchers understood if and when it was possible to engage with partners and how to feed result into the health system at the earliest opportunity. Lessons Trust and pre-existing working relationships with partners allowed the research to pivot and to continue during the pandemic. The applied partnership nature of the research meant that at times the health system was very engaged in the research and at other times (eg during COVID waves and surges or the cyber-attack) there was limited engagement. The co-production nature of the research allowed a dynamic, ongoing, two-way learning between the health system and the research team. It is extremely difficult to measure impact of research on health system and reform decisions.

Engaging Burn Survivors, Their Families, and the Burn Community in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research: A Burn Survivor- and Burn Community Stakeholder-Generated and Prioritized Research Agenda.

Burn survivors are involved in burn research, but typically in the role of research subject. We believe that the outcomes and impact of burn research can be improved by engaging survivors as collaborators in the planning, implementation, and dissemination of burn research. The goal of this work was to produce the first burn research agenda generated and prioritized by burn survivors and other stakeholders from the burn community. A series of structured focus groups covering five topics (Patient and Family Education, Aftercare, Navigating the Healthcare System, Recovery: Physical and Psychosocial, and Barriers to Research) were held with burn survivors and their family members. Specific research questions/topics were identified from the transcripts and prioritized via an anonymous survey of burn survivors, their caregivers, and other stakeholders from the burn community. From these sessions, 37 specific research questions/topics were identified and ranked. In addition, 19 research barriers were identified and ranked. This work presents an innovative approach to burn research through co-production with survivors and other stakeholders. Burn survivors and their caregivers are experts in their lived experiences. By involving them in burn research as collaborators and contributors from the very first steps of research and throughout the continuum of the research planning, conducting projects, and distributing findings, we believe that the research will be both more successful and more impactful. We have taken the first steps in burn research co-production with this novel stakeholder-generated research agenda for the burn community.

The lived experience of co-production: Reflective accounts from the InCLUDE project

BackgroundThe value of co-produced research in health and social care is increasingly recognised, but accounts into the processes and individual experiences of co-producing research are lacking. This paper describes the personal journeys of four researchers (two experts by foster caring experience and two experts by profession) throughout the life course of a co-produced research project exploring the barriers and facilitators to inclusive research in foster caring, the InCLUDE project.MethodsEach researcher kept a diary throughout the InCLUDE project of their personal reflections, questions, and learning. These were synthesised and reviewed by the researchers and two colleagues external to the team, and key themes were extracted.ResultsNarratives constructed from the diaries are presented in relation to distinct aspects of the co-production journey, alongside illustrative quotes. These aspects include: motivations for starting the project; making sense of the project; defining roles and responsibilities; challenges; and reflections on acquired knowledge and skills. From these insights, the researchers present recommendations for others endeavouring to engage in co-produced research. These include: recognising vulnerabilities and challenges during the early stages of a project; creating safe spaces; seeing the value of diversity; harnessing individual strengths; establishing a strong routine; and ensuring equal voice.ConclusionsThis paper presents a novel perspective on the realities of co-produced research by documenting the lived experiences of researchers within the context of foster care research. It highlights the importance of both measurable, tangible project outcomes, and the personal and skills growth of team members. The consistent use of diaries is encouraged as a valuable practice to capture learning, progress and achievements throughout the co-production process.

The politics of co-production and inclusive deliberation in participatory research

ABSTRACT This research engages in a methodological analysis of a participatory art project employing PhotoVoice with refugee and local community youths across two distinct sites: Istanbul and Johannesburg. The project aimed to facilitate inclusive deliberations among the youth, thereby promoting capacity building, reconciliation, and peacebuilding initiatives. Our focus is grounded in the concept of co-production as a practice and principle of inclusive deliberation within the research design, addressing a spectrum of issues from participant-driven research agenda setting, to the design and execution of the research, the selection and creation of photographs, and their dissemination. By offering a critical examination of how inclusive deliberation manifests in co-production research, we highlight the potentials, complexities, and tensions it generates. We argue that while co-produced action research embodies transversal politics, it does not necessarily disrupt the entrenched power dynamics and politically driven hierarchies within the public sphere.

Bringing data to life: A model for involving lived experience in data-driven research

ObjectiveIt is generally accepted that involving experts by experience is necessary to deliver research that is relevant to community need and to progress the data democratisation agenda. We have piloted and evaluated a model of co-production for data-driven research with seldom heard groups. ApproachIn partnership with the charity Voice of Young People in Care (VOYPIC) and a group of care experienced young people, the Administrative Data Research Centre Northern Ireland (ADRC NI) piloted and implemented a model of co-production in data-driven research. To evaluate the model, interviews were conducted with the young people, staff at VOYPIC, and ADRC NI researchers and public engagement team members. ResultsThematic analysis of interview data identified numerous benefits and barriers to co-producing data-driven research with experts by experience. We offer reflections from three perspectives (the young people, VOYPIC and ADRC NI), as well as a model that can be adapted with different lived experience groups in other data-driven research programmes. Conclusion Experts by experience can be equal partners in most stages of the data research cycle, and there are tangible benefits for all partners and the research itself. However, aligning the aspirational principles of co-production with the realities of delivering data research is challenging and has implications for achieving the democratisation of data. ImplicationsThis session will share real world perspectives on the co-production of data research with seldom heard groups.

It's bittersweet, it's uncomfortable, yes, but it's necessary. Methodological reflections on the experiences of young adults with life-shortening conditions on being involved in inclusive qualitative research

Research in palliative care is regarded as ethically challenging although there is increasing recognition that such research is important. Young adults with life-shortening conditions were not expected to reach adulthood but this population is growing and there is limited research that focuses on their lives or their experiences of engaging in research. The study explored the unintended consequences of pandemic control measures on the lives of young adults living with life-shortening conditions in the United Kingdom. This paper focuses on some of the methodological issues arising from this study, drawing on data that explores participants’ experiences of taking part. This is an interpretivist and inclusive qualitative study co-produced with three experts by experience using constructivist Grounded Theory method conducted during the first wave of the Coronavirus pandemic. In-depth interviews using a topic guide were transcribed verbatim and analysed iteratively until the point of data saturation. Twenty-six young adults aged 22–40 (17 female; 9 male), reporting a wide range of life-limiting and/or life-threatening conditions including rare and undiagnosed conditions and co-morbidities. Through analysis we identify four key themes focusing on participants’ experiences of taking part in the research: helping others and influencing change; reciprocity and support; therapeutic value; and (in)visibility and legacy. This paper offers methodological reflections on research in palliative care drawing on qualitative co-produced research involving young adults with life-shortening conditions. Our findings indicate that although participating in research can feel uncomfortable, this is outweighed by the perceived benefits of contributing to research.

The LTAR Grazing Land Common Experiment at the Great Basin.

The Long-Term Agroecosystem Research Network (LTAR), through its Common Experiment (CE) framework, contrasts prevailing and alternative agricultural practices for efficacy and sustainability within the indicator domains of environment, productivity, economics, and society. Invasive species, wildfire, and climate change are principal threats to Great Basin agroecosystems. Prescribed grazing may be an effective tool for restoring lands degraded by these disturbances. At the Great Basin (GB) LTAR site headquartered in Boise, ID, our contribution to the CE contrasts a prevailing (PRV), cattle grazing practice of fixed moderate stocking and duration with an alternative (ALT), prescribed grazing practice called high-intensity low-frequency (HILF) grazing where stocking and duration are tailored to suppress invasive annual grass competition with native or desirable plant species and thus promote recovery of rangelands degraded by annual grass invasion and recurrent wildfire. Preliminary results indicate cheatgrass density and fuel height have been reduced in ALT-treated paddocks compared to PRV paddocks. Since its inception in 2014, our GB CE has been a research co-production effort among ranchers, public land managers, and researchers. Future directions for this research will center on expanding the experiment to multiple study areas to better address the scope of the annual grass/wildfire problem. We expect this research will lead to effective and sustainable grazing practices for restoring >41 million hectares of degraded rangelands in the Great Basin and other areas of the western United States.

An auto-ethnographic study of co-produced health research in a patient organisation: unpacking the good, the bad, and the unspoken

BackgroundIn rare diseases, limited access to services and rare disease experts may force families to act as medical advocates for their child; they can volunteer to support clinician-initiated research or initiate and lead research themselves. Ketotic Hypoglycemia International (KHI) is a new, global organization for families affected by idiopathic ketotic hypoglycemia (IKH) and is run solely by volunteers. Doing research together, families and international experts in a collaborative process such as at KHI, also referred to as patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) or extreme citizen science, is often praised for its positive effects on the research and the stakeholders involved.MethodsWe used auto-ethnographic narratives from parents and medical professionals in KHI to report on their experiences with co-produced health research. All co-authors wrote down their experiences in relation to three topics: time invested, work invested and power dynamics.ResultsWhilst the parents and health care professionals felt a new hope for (their) children with IKH, they also felt pressure to contribute time or to be flexible in how and when they dedicated time towards the organization. The power dynamics were characterised by a change in the relationship between the parents and medical experts; the parent being taught by the expert shifted to the expert learning from the lived experience of the parent. Both parents and medical experts struggled with maintaining boundaries and safeguarding their mental health.ConclusionOur findings call for the need to secure and prioritize funding for patient organizations, to enable them to create the sustainable architecture required for meaningful PPIE within these organizations. The morals and often deeply personal reasons for engaging with voluntary work in health research, can lead to overstepping of boundaries. As a result of our research, we call for the development of ethics of care guidelines within collaborative health research.

Co-producing research study recruitment strategies with and for children and young people for paediatric chronic pain studies.

Children and young people experiencing chronic pain are at greater risk of inequitable and poor-quality pain management, which has implications for future management of pain in adulthood. Most chronic pain research is conducted with adults who are more likely to be middle-class, white and monocultured. Inclusive and diverse recruitment practices in paediatric pain research can be an area in which we can address this imbalance of representation. The aim of this current work was to explore these practices and to co-produce recommendations regarding recruitment strategies for paediatric pain research. The research team worked with Your Rheum, a United Kingdom young person's advisory group (ages 11-24 years) and diagnosed with rheumatic condition(s), the opportunity to input into rheumatology research. At a virtual Your Rheum meeting, eight young people (female = 7, male = 1, age range 12-24) took part in group discussions, sharing their experiences of taking part in research and their decision process. Online tools, including Mentimeter and Miro, were used to aid conversations and share ideas. Most young people had experience of taking part in research as a study participant (n = 5). Recommendations synthesised included increased awareness of research in general. The young people discussed being open to hearing about research opportunities; they reflected that they are rarely exposed to these invitations or hear about current research. The clinic environment was highlighted as a "good and trustworthy" recruitment area - being approached by a member of the research team was considered ideal, even if it was someone they had not met previously. Many young people recalled little discussions of research at their clinical appointments. Deciding to participate in research included the following considerations: benefit/impact; connecting with others; research topic; which is then balanced against convenience, and reimbursement. The young people felt that taking part in research was empowering and helped them take ownership of their pain management. It is essential to understand the perspectives of potential study participants, to plan successful recruitment strategies. Ensuring we consider these factors when designing our studies and recruitment strategies is beneficial to all involved. Co-produced recruitment strategies would aid inclusive (and increased) research participation.

A peer mentoring program for eating disorders: improved symptomatology and reduced hospital admissions, three years and a pandemic on

BackgroundPeer support involves people (mentors) using their own experiences to assist others (mentees). The impetus to include peer support in eating disorder recovery is high, however research on implementation of peer roles in eating disorder management is limited. A previous pilot study found positive but preliminary results for a Peer Mentor Program (PMP) for eating disorders. The PMP has since developed over time, including broadening its eligibility criteria and shifting to predominantly online delivery during COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the updated version of the PMP, on a larger and more diverse group of mentees.MethodsPreviously collected PMP service data from July 2020 to April 2022 (during COVID-19 lockdowns) was evaluated for fifty-one mentees using mixed methods. Data from program start (baseline), mid-point (3-months) and end (6-months) for measures of eating disorder symptoms as measured by the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q) and psychological wellbeing as measured by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) was evaluated. Frequency of eating disorder-related hospital admissions during PMP participation versus the 6 months prior, direct program costs and qualitative mentee feedback were also analysed. One way ANOVA’s with post hoc tests were used to evaluate symptom change and thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data.ResultsProgram attendance averaged 12.12 (SD ± 1.57) of a possible 13 sessions. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were demonstrated across all subscales of the eating disorder and psychological wellbeing symptom measures. EDE-Q Global score and DASS scores decreased significantly by program end. Fewer eating disorder-related hospital admissions were reported during PMP than the 6-months prior. Qualitative findings were positive and themed around the unique benefits of lived experience connection, a new kind of space for recovery, hope and motivation for change. Challenges with the time limited nature of the mentee-mentor relationship were expressed.ConclusionsThe important benefits of a PMP for individuals with eating disorders are further supported. There is a pressing need for high quality, co-produced research, utilising a mixture of designs and fidelity to core peer work principles, to inform further implementation of peer work into eating disorder policy and practice.

Development of the TIFFIN recommendations for co-producing palliative and end-of-life care research with individuals with lived experience of homelessness: A qualitative study.

Palliative care for people experiencing homelessness is a complex field. Due to the intricate nuances and heterogeneity in the experience of palliative care for people without secure housing, it is essential that research is informed by people with lived experience of homelessness. However, as homelessness is often associated with loss, trauma and high levels of exposure to death, any co-production of research, particularly in the field of palliative and end-of-life-care, must be trauma-informed. To produce recommendations for co-producing palliative and end-of-life-care research with people with lived experience of homelessness. A qualitative study comprising semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Data were analysed using iterative, reflexive thematic analysis. Twenty-seven participants were recruited. Sixteen professionals with experience of co-producing research with people with lived experience of homelessness; eleven people with lived experience of homelessness. Six key themes were developed: transparency, importance of engagement and rapport, facilitating equitable involvement via person centred approach, financial recognition of involvement, involvement and growth through a trauma-informed approach and navigating institutional resistance and attitudes. Recommendations corresponding to the core themes were developed (TIFFIN recommendations). Co-production of palliative care research with people with lived experience of homelessness is essential, but must be done carefully and sensitively. As a population with high levels of premature morbidity and mortality yet low access to palliative care, the TIFFIN recommendations could help to support the involvement of people with lived experience of homelessness in palliative and end-of-life-care care research.

What does 'co-production' look like for food system transformation? Mapping the evidence across Transforming UK Food Systems (TUKFS) projects.

Co-production is a collaborative way of working which emphasises the exchange of diverse forms of knowledge in an equal partnership for equal benefits. Co-produced research is a key strategic aim of the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Transforming UK Food Systems (TUKFS) Strategic Priorities Fund; this research programme brings together researchers, policymakers, industry and communities to create positive change in the way food is produced, accessed and consumed. However, more generally, there are diverse understandings of co-production and a lack of consensus on what 'good practice' looks like. Therefore, this study aimed to identify and map examples of co-production methods employed across the TUKFS programme. Two creative workshops (n = 15 participants), conversations with TUKFS researchers and stakeholders (n = 15), and systematic analysis of project documents were used to critically explore co-production activities within six TUKFS projects. A range of co-production activities were identified. Findings highlighted areas of 'messiness' and complexity, challenges associated with applying co-production approaches and practical solutions. Four key shared principles for co-production were identified: (1) Relationships: developing and maintaining reciprocity-based partnerships; (2) Knowledge: recognising the contribution of diverse forms of expertise; (3) Power: considering power dynamics and addressing imbalances; and (4) Inclusivity: ensuring research is accessible to all who wish to participate. Opportunities for reflection and reflexivity were considered crucial across all these areas. Findings contribute important insights towards a shared conceptual understanding of co-production for food system transformation research. This paper makes recommendations for researchers, practitioners, academic institutions and funders working in this area of research and practice.

Co-production of a systematic review on decision coaching: a mixed methods case study within a review

BackgroundCo-production is a collaborative approach to prepare, plan, conduct, and apply research with those who will use or be impacted by research (knowledge users). Our team of knowledge users and researchers sought to conduct and evaluate co-production of a systematic review on decision coaching.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods case study within a review to describe team co-production of a systematic review. We used the Collaborative Research Framework to support an integrated knowledge translation approach to guide a team through the steps in co-production of a systematic review. The team agreed to conduct self-study as a study within a review to learn from belonging to a co-production research team. A core group that includes a patient partner developed and conducted the study within a review. Data sources were surveys and documents. The study coordinator administered surveys to determine participant preferred and actual levels of engagement, experiences, and perceptions. We included frequency counts, content, and document analysis.ResultsWe describe co-production of a systematic review. Of 17 team members, 14 (82%) agreed to study participation and of those 12 (86%) provided data pre- and post-systematic review. Most participants identified as women (n = 9, 75.0%), researchers (n = 7, 58%), trainees (n = 4, 33%), and/or clinicians (n = 2, 17%) with two patient/caregiver partners (17%). The team self-organized study governance with an executive and Steering Committee and agreed on research co-production actions and strategies. Satisfaction for engagement in the 11 systematic review steps ranged from 75 to 92%, with one participant who did not respond to any of the questions (8%) for all. Participants reported positive experiences with team communication processes (n = 12, 100%), collaboration (n = 12, 100%), and negotiation (n = 10–12, 83–100%). Participants perceived the systematic review as co-produced (n = 12, 100%) with collaborative (n = 8, 67%) and engagement activities to characterize co-production (n = 8, 67%). Participants indicated that they would not change the co-production approach (n = 8, 66%). Five participants (42%) reported team logistics challenges and four (33%) were unaware of challenges.ConclusionsOur results indicate that it is feasible to use an integrated knowledge translation approach to conduct a systematic review. We demonstrate the importance of a relational approach to research co-production, and that it is essential to plan and actively support team engagement in the research lifecycle.

"It's really important work…and celebrating that, I think, is really important" - co-produced qualitative research into future of mental health nurse education.

The education of mental health nurses has long remained a contentious topic in the UK and internationally. This research seeks to gather the perspectives of those directly affected by mental health nurse education. To investigate what knowledge, skills and values current mental health nursing students, graduate mental health nurses and people with lived experience of accessing mental health services believe should be paramount within pre-registration education. Data was gathered through focus groups involving a mix of pre- and post-qualified mental health nurses and people with lived experience of accessing mental health services. Data was collected through audio recordings, which were transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis. The analysis generated four themes of: (i) Values and ethics-based education, (ii) Self-awareness, (iii) Understanding and therapeutically being with others and (iv) Specialism versus Genericism. The findings speak to the special nature of mental health nursing and the need for students to develop specialist mental health knowledge and skills, alongside self-knowledge. The findings provide a unique insight into the aspects of pre-registration nursing felt to be most valuable by the three participant groups in this study. The findings reiterate the importance nurse education celebrating the specialism of mental health nursing and adds to the growing weight of literature for increased specialism with future education standard reviews.

Families supporting people with mental health challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic: learnings from a co-designed and co-delivered study

The significant demand for and reduction in mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in family carers providing higher levels and increased hours of support of increased complexity. Guided conversations within seven co-designed online focus groups with 73 family carers, representing diverse communities and ages, explored the experiences of and desired changes for mental health service provision. Six themes emerged: service users’ experiences; the effects of system failures and service provisions; the impact on carers’ health and well-being; unmet community needs; responsive innovations; and policy and practice recommendations. Co-producing research with families elevated family voices and supported carers in expressing their experiences, needs and rights.

Policing Vulnerability: The Care and Control of Sex Workers Through Designated Police Officers

Abstract The state’s duty to protect vulnerable people gives rise to powerful forms of social intervention, especially in policing. This article reports from co-produced multimethods research focussed on one form of policing vulnerability within an English police force; the role of a specialist sex worker liaison officer (SWLO). Findings highlight that an enhanced focus on vulnerability through the role was highly valued by sex workers; building trust and improving investigations of crimes against sex workers. However, social control was the defining parameter for the intervention, with different implications across the diversity of the sex industry. Drawing on Gilson’s (2021) intersectional feminist philosophy work, we situate findings within critical attention to policing vulnerability, arguing the embedding of vulnerability within governance apparatus orientated to social control must be met with vigilance if it is to be progressive rather than reactionary.

Bridging the gap between research evidence and its implementation in public health practice: case studies of embedded research model

AimTo investigate the potential of embedded research in bridging the gap between research evidence and its implementation in public health practice.MethodsUsing a case study methodology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 4 embedded researchers, 9 public health practitioners, and 4 other stakeholders (2 teachers and 2 students) across four case study sites. Sites and individuals were purposively selected. Sites included two local authorities, one secondary school, and one sports organisation. Thematic data analysis was adopted to analyse the qualitative data.ResultsFour themes were identified: (1) building and maintaining relationships, (2) working with stakeholders, (3) informing practice, and (4) critical reflection.ConclusionsEmbedded researchers build and maintain relationships with practitioners and other stakeholders to produce research. Evidence from the co-produced research informs future practice and research to improve service and delivery rendered to the public. Thus, embedded researchers use their role to bridge the research evidence - implementation gap in public health practice.

Planning for the development of strength and conditioning coaches’ psychosocial competencies

ABSTRACT Co-produced research can engage academics with non-academic partners to improve policy and practices in everyday life. Accordingly, we collaborated with the United Kingdom’s Strength and Conditioning Association (UKSCA) stakeholders. As an ongoing participatory action research (PAR), in phase one we explored the lack of psychosocial competencies in the UKSCA’s predominantly positivist and bioscientific coach education curriculum and their suggestions for change. This manuscript focuses on the planning step of phase two of our PAR. Twenty-six UKSCA stakeholders engaged in focus groups or one-on-one interviews where they discussed their knowledge, beliefs, feelings, and suggestions of learning psychosocial coaching competencies as part of the UKSCA’s coach education and accreditation pathway. We used a thematic narrative analysis to create one story involving five sequential themes that build towards a plan for the UKSCA’s curriculum changes. The narrative arc starts with the stakeholders uncovering the central problem – the lack of psychosocial competencies. Then, the stakeholders identify the current curriculum as scientific and objective, explore how psychosocial competencies are currently learned through experience, and the story climaxes with a debate on the need for change. In the resolution, they suggest actions for change, particularly a new module for the UKSCA, taught by psychosocial content experts. In the challenge of introducing new disciplinary knowledge to the field of strength and conditioning, the story outlines how PAR can lead to the organisation of a practical plan for ongoing co-production, which may shape coaches’ knowledge construction and a plurality of ontological and epistemological perspectives within the UKSCA.