One Health is an integrative approach at the interface of humans, animals and the environment, which can be implemented as Research-Practice-Collaboration (RPC) for its interdisciplinarity and intersectoral focus on the co-production of knowledge. To exemplify this, the present commentary shows the example of the Forschungskolleg \"One Health and Urban Transformation\" funded by the Ministry of Culture and Science of the State Government of Nord Rhine Westphalia in Germany. After analysis, the factors identified for a better implementation of RPC for One Health were the ones that allowed for constant communication and the reduction of power asymmetries between practitioners and academics in the co-production of knowledge. In this light, the training of a new generation of scientists at the boundaries of different disciplines that have mediation skills between academia and practice is an important contribution with great implications for societal change that can aid the further development of RPC.
« Une Santé» (en anglais: One Health) est un approche intégratif situé à l’interface entre les humains, les animaux, et l’environnement, qui peut être implémenté tel qu’une collaboration entre recherche et pratique (CRP) grâce à son interdisciplinarité et son accent sur la cocréation du savoir. Pour illustrer ce point, cet article prend le Forschungskolleg « Une Santé et Transformation Urbaine» (en anglais: One Health and Urban Transformation) financé par le Ministère de la Culture et Sciences du gouvernement du Nord-Rhin Westphalie en Allemagne. D’après nos analyses, les facteurs identifiés comme soutenant une meilleure implémentation du CRP pour le programme One Health sont ceux qui permettent une communication constante et une réduction des asymétries causés par le pouvoir entre les praticiens et les entités académiques dans la cocréation du savoir. Sur ce point, l’éducation d’une nouvelle génération de scientifiques, à l’intersection des différentes disciplines et avec des fortes aptitudes à la médiation entre la pratique et le monde académique, est une contribution important avec des grandes implications pour le changement sociétal, et qui peut en outre soutenir le développement du CRP.

Until recently, developing health technologies was time-consuming and expensive, and often involved patients, doctors, and other health care professionals only as passive recipients of the end product. So far, users have been minimally involved in the ideation and creation stages of digital health technologies. In order to best address users\' unmet needs, a transdisciplinary and user-led approach, involving cocreation and direct user feedback, is required. In this context, hackathon events have become increasingly popular in generating enthusiasm for user-centered innovation.
This case study describes preparatory steps and the performance of a health hackathon directly involving patients and health care professionals at all stages. Feasibility and outcomes were assessed, leading to the development of systematic recommendations for future hackathons as a vehicle for bottom-up innovation in health care.
A 2-day hackathon was conducted in February 2017 in Berlin, Germany. Data were collected through a field study. Collected field notes were subsequently discussed in 15 informal meetings among the research team. Experiences of conducting two further hackathons in December 2017 and November 2018 were included.
In total, 30 participants took part, with 63% (19/30) of participants between 25 and 34 years of age, 30% (9/30) between 35 and 44 years of age, and 7% (2/30) younger than 25 years of age. A total of 43% (13/30) of the participants were female. The participation rate of medical experts, including patients and health care professionals, was 30% (9/30). Five multidisciplinary teams were formed and each tackled a specific health care problem. All presented projects were apps: a chatbot for skin cancer recognition, an augmented reality exposure-based therapy (eg, for arachnophobia), an app for medical neighborhood connectivity, a doctor appointment platform, and a self-care app for people suffering from depression. Patients and health care professionals initiated all of the projects. Conducting the hackathon resulted in significant growth of the digital health community of Berlin and was followed up by larger hackathons. Systematic recommendations for conducting cost-efficient hackathons (n≤30) were developed, including aspects of community building, stakeholder engagement, mentoring, themes, announcements, follow-up, and timing for each step.
This study shows that hackathons are effective in bringing innovation to health care and are more cost- and time-efficient and potentially more sustainable than traditional medical device and digital product development. Our systematic recommendations can be useful to other individuals and organizations that want to establish user-led innovation in academic hospitals by conducting transdisciplinary hackathons.

Polypharmacy can be either beneficial or harmful to children. We conducted a scoping review to examine the concept of pediatric polypharmacy: its definition, prevalence, extent and gaps in research. In this manuscript, we report our transdisciplinary scoping review methodology.
After establishing a transdisciplinary team, we iteratively developed standard operating procedures for the study\'s search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, screening, and data extraction. We searched eight bibliographic databases, screened abstracts and full text articles, and extracted data from included studies using standardized forms. We held regular team meetings and performed ongoing internal validity measurements to maintain consistent and quality outputs.
With the aid of EPPI Reviewer collaborative software, our transdisciplinary team of nine members performed dual reviews of 363 included studies after dual screening of 4398 abstracts and 1082 full text articles. We achieved overall agreement of 85% and a kappa coefficient of 0.71 (95% CI 0.68-0.74) while screening full text articles. The screening and review processes required about seven hours per extracted study. The two pharmacists, an epidemiologist, a neurologist, and a librarian on the review team provided internal consultation in these key disciplines. A stakeholder group of 10 members with expertise in evidence synthesis, research implementation, pediatrics, mental health, epilepsy, pharmacoepidemiology, and pharmaceutical outcomes were periodically consulted to further characterize pediatric polypharmacy.
A transdisciplinary approach to scoping reviews, including internal and external consultation, should be considered when addressing complex cross-disciplinary questions.