PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
In health and physical activity promotion, there is growing interest in co-creation approaches that involve researchers and non-academic stakeholders in developing new interventions. Previous research has shown the promising results of cooperative planning as a co-creation approach in building new capacities and implementing physical activity-promoting interventions in nursing care and automotive mechatronics. However, it remains unclear whether (1) cooperative planning for physical activity promotion can be successfully transferred to other settings in the nursing care and automotive mechatronic sectors and (2) what key factors influence its success or failure.
We conducted a multiple case study in three settings in the nursing care and automotive mechatronics sectors. Following a mixed methods approach, we collected, analyzed, and triangulated data from documents (n = 17), questionnaires (n = 66), and interviews (n = 6). Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and through using nonparametric analyses of variance; qualitative data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis by extraction.
The transfer of cooperative planning to new settings was realized, though the impact varied by setting. While the interventions were developed and implemented in nursing care settings, interventions were developed but not implemented in the automotive mechatronics setting. In this context, intervention implementation was influenced by 11 key factors: champion, commitment, embedment, empowerment, engagement, health-promoting leadership, ownership, relevance, resources, responsibility, and strategic planning. Furthermore, the transfer of cooperative planning was influenced by different activity characteristics, namely elaboration & reconsideration, group composition, number of meetings, participation, period, prioritization, and researchers\' input & support.
The present article contributes to a better understanding of a co-creation approach utilized for physical activity promotion and provides new insights into (1) the transferability of cooperative planning and (2) the associated key factors influencing intervention implementation. The success of cooperative planning varied by setting and was influenced by several activity characteristics and key factors, some of which showed complex relationships. This raises the question of whether some settings might benefit more from a co-creation approach than others. Therefore, future co-creation initiatives should carefully consider the specific characteristics of a setting to select and apply the most appropriate approach.
We conducted a multiple case study in three settings in the nursing care and automotive mechatronics sectors. Following a mixed methods approach, we collected, analyzed, and triangulated data from documents (n = 17), questionnaires (n = 66), and interviews (n = 6). Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and through using nonparametric analyses of variance; qualitative data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis by extraction.
The transfer of cooperative planning to new settings was realized, though the impact varied by setting. While the interventions were developed and implemented in nursing care settings, interventions were developed but not implemented in the automotive mechatronics setting. In this context, intervention implementation was influenced by 11 key factors: champion, commitment, embedment, empowerment, engagement, health-promoting leadership, ownership, relevance, resources, responsibility, and strategic planning. Furthermore, the transfer of cooperative planning was influenced by different activity characteristics, namely elaboration & reconsideration, group composition, number of meetings, participation, period, prioritization, and researchers\' input & support.
The present article contributes to a better understanding of a co-creation approach utilized for physical activity promotion and provides new insights into (1) the transferability of cooperative planning and (2) the associated key factors influencing intervention implementation. The success of cooperative planning varied by setting and was influenced by several activity characteristics and key factors, some of which showed complex relationships. This raises the question of whether some settings might benefit more from a co-creation approach than others. Therefore, future co-creation initiatives should carefully consider the specific characteristics of a setting to select and apply the most appropriate approach.
摘要：
在促进健康和体育活动方面，越来越多的人对共同创造方法感兴趣，这些方法涉及研究人员和非学术利益相关者开发新的干预措施。先前的研究表明，合作计划作为一种共同创造方法，可以在护理和汽车机电一体化中建立新的能力并实施促进身体活动的干预措施。然而,目前尚不清楚(1)促进体育活动的合作计划是否可以成功地转移到护理和汽车机电一体化领域的其他环境中；(2)影响其成败的关键因素是什么。
我们在护理和汽车机电一体化领域的三个环境中进行了多案例研究。遵循混合方法方法，我们收集,分析,并从文档中三角化数据(n=17)，问卷(n=66)，和访谈（n=6）。定量数据进行描述性分析，并使用非参数方差分析；定性数据通过提取使用定性内容分析进行分析。
实现了合作规划向新环境的转移，尽管影响因设置而异。虽然干预措施是在护理环境中制定和实施的，在汽车机电一体化环境中开发了干预措施，但没有实施干预措施。在这种情况下，干预实施受11个关键因素的影响：冠军，承诺,嵌入，赋权，订婚,促进健康的领导，所有权,相关性，资源,责任,和战略规划。此外，合作计划的转移受不同活动特征的影响，即阐述和重新考虑，组组成,会议次数,参与,period,优先次序,和研究人员的投入和支持。
本文有助于更好地理解用于体育活动促进的共同创造方法，并为（1）合作计划的可转移性和（2）影响干预实施的相关关键因素提供了新的见解。合作计划的成功因设置而异，并受多个活动特征和关键因素的影响，其中一些表现出复杂的关系。这提出了一个问题，即某些设置是否可能比其他设置从共同创造方法中受益更多。因此,未来的共同创造计划应仔细考虑环境的具体特征，以选择和应用最合适的方法。
我们在护理和汽车机电一体化领域的三个环境中进行了多案例研究。遵循混合方法方法，我们收集,分析,并从文档中三角化数据(n=17)，问卷(n=66)，和访谈（n=6）。定量数据进行描述性分析，并使用非参数方差分析；定性数据通过提取使用定性内容分析进行分析。
实现了合作规划向新环境的转移，尽管影响因设置而异。虽然干预措施是在护理环境中制定和实施的，在汽车机电一体化环境中开发了干预措施，但没有实施干预措施。在这种情况下，干预实施受11个关键因素的影响：冠军，承诺,嵌入，赋权，订婚,促进健康的领导，所有权,相关性，资源,责任,和战略规划。此外，合作计划的转移受不同活动特征的影响，即阐述和重新考虑，组组成,会议次数,参与,period,优先次序,和研究人员的投入和支持。
本文有助于更好地理解用于体育活动促进的共同创造方法，并为（1）合作计划的可转移性和（2）影响干预实施的相关关键因素提供了新的见解。合作计划的成功因设置而异，并受多个活动特征和关键因素的影响，其中一些表现出复杂的关系。这提出了一个问题，即某些设置是否可能比其他设置从共同创造方法中受益更多。因此,未来的共同创造计划应仔细考虑环境的具体特征，以选择和应用最合适的方法。
