Cargando…

What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature

Co-creating patient-facing educational materials (PEMs) can enhance person-centered care by responding to patient priorities and unmet needs. Little data exist on ‘best practices’ for co-creation. We followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework to conduct a systematic literature search of nine databas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McDonald, Isabella R., Blocker, Elizabeth S., Weyman, Elizabeth A., Smith, Neil, Dwyer, Andrew A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10572900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37830651
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11192615
_version_ 1785120340522827776
author McDonald, Isabella R.
Blocker, Elizabeth S.
Weyman, Elizabeth A.
Smith, Neil
Dwyer, Andrew A.
author_facet McDonald, Isabella R.
Blocker, Elizabeth S.
Weyman, Elizabeth A.
Smith, Neil
Dwyer, Andrew A.
author_sort McDonald, Isabella R.
collection PubMed
description Co-creating patient-facing educational materials (PEMs) can enhance person-centered care by responding to patient priorities and unmet needs. Little data exist on ‘best practices’ for co-creation. We followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework to conduct a systematic literature search of nine databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, TRIP—April, 2022) to identify empirical studies published in English on PEM co-creation to distill ‘best practices’. Following an independent dual review of articles, data were collated into tables, and thematic analysis was employed to synthesize ‘best practices’ that were validated by a patient experienced in co-creating PEMs. Bias was not assessed, given the study heterogeneity. Of 6998 retrieved articles, 44 were included for data extraction/synthesis. Studies utilized heterogeneous methods spanning a range of health conditions/populations. Only 5/45 (11%) studies defined co-creation, 14 (32%) used a guiding framework, and 18 (41%) used validated evaluation tools. Six ‘best practices’ were identified: (1) begin with a review of the literature, (2) utilize a framework to inform the process, (3) involve clinical and patient experts from the beginning, (4) engage diverse perspectives, (5) ensure patients have the final decision, and (6) employ validated evaluation tools. This scoping review highlights the need for clear definitions and validated evaluation measures to guide and assess the co-creation process. Identified ‘best practices’ are relevant for use with diverse patient populations and health issues to enhance person-centered care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10572900
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105729002023-10-14 What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature McDonald, Isabella R. Blocker, Elizabeth S. Weyman, Elizabeth A. Smith, Neil Dwyer, Andrew A. Healthcare (Basel) Article Co-creating patient-facing educational materials (PEMs) can enhance person-centered care by responding to patient priorities and unmet needs. Little data exist on ‘best practices’ for co-creation. We followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework to conduct a systematic literature search of nine databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, TRIP—April, 2022) to identify empirical studies published in English on PEM co-creation to distill ‘best practices’. Following an independent dual review of articles, data were collated into tables, and thematic analysis was employed to synthesize ‘best practices’ that were validated by a patient experienced in co-creating PEMs. Bias was not assessed, given the study heterogeneity. Of 6998 retrieved articles, 44 were included for data extraction/synthesis. Studies utilized heterogeneous methods spanning a range of health conditions/populations. Only 5/45 (11%) studies defined co-creation, 14 (32%) used a guiding framework, and 18 (41%) used validated evaluation tools. Six ‘best practices’ were identified: (1) begin with a review of the literature, (2) utilize a framework to inform the process, (3) involve clinical and patient experts from the beginning, (4) engage diverse perspectives, (5) ensure patients have the final decision, and (6) employ validated evaluation tools. This scoping review highlights the need for clear definitions and validated evaluation measures to guide and assess the co-creation process. Identified ‘best practices’ are relevant for use with diverse patient populations and health issues to enhance person-centered care. MDPI 2023-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10572900/ /pubmed/37830651 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11192615 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
McDonald, Isabella R.
Blocker, Elizabeth S.
Weyman, Elizabeth A.
Smith, Neil
Dwyer, Andrew A.
What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature
title What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature
title_full What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature
title_fullStr What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature
title_full_unstemmed What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature
title_short What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature
title_sort what are the best practices for co-creating patient-facing educational materials? a scoping review of the literature
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10572900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37830651
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11192615
work_keys_str_mv AT mcdonaldisabellar whatarethebestpracticesforcocreatingpatientfacingeducationalmaterialsascopingreviewoftheliterature
AT blockerelizabeths whatarethebestpracticesforcocreatingpatientfacingeducationalmaterialsascopingreviewoftheliterature
AT weymanelizabetha whatarethebestpracticesforcocreatingpatientfacingeducationalmaterialsascopingreviewoftheliterature
AT smithneil whatarethebestpracticesforcocreatingpatientfacingeducationalmaterialsascopingreviewoftheliterature
AT dwyerandrewa whatarethebestpracticesforcocreatingpatientfacingeducationalmaterialsascopingreviewoftheliterature