BACKGROUND: Inclusion in public health research of young people from low-income households and those from minority ethnic groups remains low. It is recognised that there is a need to change the way in which research is conducted so that it becomes more inclusive. The aim of this work was to identify novel and innovative ways to maximise recruitment and inclusion of diverse participants when doing co-production within very short time frames for emergency responses.
METHODS: We conducted interviews with young people from low-income and minority ethnic backgrounds, and members or leaders of groups or organisations supporting or representing young people from underserved communities.
RESULTS: A total of 42 participants took part in an interview. This included 30 young people from low income or minority ethnic backgrounds and 12 community leaders/service providers. Of the 30 young people, 26 participants identified as female and 12 participants identified as being from a minority ethnic background. Participants discussed a number of interrelated barriers to research involvement and identified ways in which barriers may be reduced. Prejudice and discrimination experienced by young people from underserved communities has led to substantial mistrust of educational and governmental establishments. Rigid and unfamiliar research practices further limit the involvement of young people. Four themes were identified as ways of supporting involvement, including: making opportunities available for young people, adaptations to research governance, understanding and acknowledging challenges faced by young people, and ensuring reciprocal benefits.
CONCLUSIONS: This research explored barriers to engagement in rapid public health co-production. Working with communities to co-produce rapid recruitment and research procedures to suit the needs and the context in which young people live is necessary.

Australia is a multicultural nation with nearly 30% of the population born overseas. Migrants\' mental health can be impacted by discrimination, racism and experiences relating to asylum and immigration. These can be compounded by low help-seeking caused by stigmatized beliefs and poor mental health literacy. My Mind, My Voice (MMMV) is a co-designed program aiming to promote awareness of mental health and wellbeing for people with a culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) background. This research project explored the perceived impacts and value of MMMV and processes leading to those impacts. A mixture of internal quantitative and qualitative evaluation surveys (n = 32) and researcher-conducted semi-structured interviews (n = 9) were conducted with CALD organization and community members who attended training workshops, presented MMMV events or attended an event. Data were analysed using a reflexive thematic analysis approach. Five themes were developed: culturally relevant and respectful, cross-cultural connections, the importance of language, increasing confidence and literacy and the potential to change attitudes. Being involved with a co-produced program that was culturally relevant and respectful was a positive experience that enhanced people\'s confidence and literacy. Feeling respected, valued and validated helped participants feel empowered to develop and deliver mental health and wellbeing education in their community. Open, honest conversations are an important way to break down stigma and start conversations about mental health and wellbeing in CALD communities. Evaluation outcomes demonstrate the success of MMMV\'s collaborative approach, which can inform the development and evaluation of CALD mental health promotion interventions.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research is widely acknowledged as essential to achieving successful and impactful research. Despite this acknowledgement, there are limited reports on how to approach and apply meaningful PPI throughout the research cycle and how to address challenges for researchers such as doctoral students, particularly when undertaking research on sensitive topics. This paper provides insights and examples for researchers new to PPI, on the impact of active PPI and recommendations for building and developing a PPI group in a paediatric focused doctoral research study with bereaved parents and carers.
METHODS: PPI was informed by the research cycle. The GRIPP2 short-form checklist was used to report PPI. The research was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research.
RESULTS: PPI enhanced the research through input into the study design, recruitment, co-design of the study website and branding; and ethics amendments to increase participation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The literature review was extended to incorporate a PPI consultation phase and members contributed to data analysis. A flexible approach enabled involvement to develop iteratively throughout the research study, resulting in changes being made to enhance the study design and outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: This paper contributes to the limited knowledge base on embedding PPI into a doctoral research study and within the paediatric setting specifically working in partnership with bereaved parents and carers. Employing an adaptive approach to meet individual PPI needs, building a trusting and respectful partnership, creating shared ownership and investment in the research, are essential components to successful PPI.
Involving patients and the public in research provides the opportunity to develop meaningful outcomes that are relevant to the population being studied. Despite the benefits of patient and public involvement in research, guidelines that support researchers in doing so, lack detail on how to do this effectively. This is particularly important for those new to research such as doctoral students, who have so much to learn in developing a research study. Different approaches and applications to involvement are also likely to be needed depending on the population being studied. There are limited published papers on examples of how doctoral students have engaged and involved patients and the public in the context of their studies, and specifically within the children’s setting, working in partnership with bereaved parents and carers, or those with seriously ill children. This paper offers examples and insights for those new to research in how to involve patients and the public throughout the research cycle. Specifically undertaking research in a sensitive subject of a particular childhood cancer which has poor outcomes and how to incorporate and evaluate successful patient and public involvement in their research activities such as study design and analysis of the results. Parent and carer reflections on their experiences of being involved are also reported and researcher recommendations for approaching and working with a patient and public group are described.

BACKGROUND: Recent years have seen a dramatic growth in interest in the nature and extent of co-production in the health and social care sectors. Due to the intense proliferation of work on co-production, there is intense variation in practice in how co-production is defined, understood and used in practice.
METHODS: We conducted a narrative review to explore, and provide an overview of, which models of health and social care co-production have been developed, applied and critiqued over the last few decades.
RESULTS: Seventy-three peer reviewed articles met our inclusion criteria. In this set of articles, we identified three broad types of models: conceptual/theoretical; practice-oriented; and presenting a typology. We found that practice-oriented models, predominantly from the Health Services Research and Quality Improvement literature, had largely not drawn on conceptual/theoretical models from the disciplinary fields of Public Administration & Management and Sociology. In particular, they have largely neglected theoretical perspectives on relationships and power and agency in co-production work, as well as the concepts of Service-Dominant Logic and Public Service-Dominant Logic as ways to think about the joint, collaborative process of producing new value, particularly in the context of the use of a service.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review has identified distinct literatures which have contributed a variety of models of health and social care co-production. Our findings highlight under-explored dimensions of co-production that merit greater attention in the health and social care contexts. The overview of models of co-production we provide aims to offer a useful platform for the integration of different perspectives on co-production in future research and practice in health and social care.

For many disabled people, violence can become an unwanted, yet ordinary part of everyday life. Often, these crimes are attributed to understandings of disabled people as vulnerable and largely, passive victims. Attending to the aims of this special issue, this paper aims to dismantle these stereotypes and attend to the unique ways that disabled people can resist and respond to hate crime through creative and collaborative research practices. Building upon this, I argue that there is a pressing need for hate studies researchers to work \"with\" and not \"on\" those who have experienced targeted violence. Working in this way builds upon long-standing efforts of disabled activists and disabilities studies researchers to challenge reductive research practices by working in more collective and inclusive ways. To demonstrate this, I reflect upon a project working in partnership with disabled people to create a disability hate crime toolkit. The toolkit, now published, shares accessible and informative resources that can be used to raise awareness about disability hate crime. While the focus of this paper is disability, I consider methods of collaboration, co-production and participation that can be drawn upon by researchers to respond to hate crime and interpersonal violence more broadly.

BACKGROUND: When creating resources, such as psychoeducational materials, for children and families, it is essential to consult all stakeholders. By asking service users what they would find helpful, we can ensure that psychoeducational materials developed are directly addressing a need. This report summarises the process of co-developing a psychoeducational video with young people for the adults in their lives.
RESULTS: The idea for a psychoeducational video originated from discussions within a Youth Advisory Group in a South London Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service. The group shared that they wanted a way of letting the adults in their lives know what is and is not helpful to hear when they are experiencing mental health distress. A workshop was held with young people to gather ideas for the content and style of a psychoeducational video resource. Through co-design methods, themes were identified including prioritising the young person\'s lived experience, the importance of listening, respecting and validating, adults not making assumptions about a diagnosis, and actively involving young people in care planning. A script and accompanying video were produced over several co-design sessions and shared via multiple online mass communication channels.
CONCLUSIONS: This project was co-produced at all stages by young people with lived experience of mental health difficulties to develop a digital resource that they considered necessary and meaningful. Centring the voices of young people when producing materials concerning their mental health results in valuable resources and can bring autonomy to those involved.

Hydrogen-ethanol co-production can significantly improve the energy conversion efficiency of corn stalk (CS). In this study, with CS as the raw material, the co-production characteristics of one-step and two-step photo-fermentation hydrogen production (PFHP) and ethanol production were investigated. In addition, the gas and liquid characteristics of the experiment were analyzed. The kinetics of hydrogen-ethanol co-production was calculated, and the economics of hydrogen and ethanol were analyzed. Results of the experiments indicated that the two-step hydrogen-ethanol co-production had the best hydrogen production performance when the concentration of CS was 25 g/L. The total hydrogen production was 350.08 mL, and the hydrogen yield was 70.02 mL/g, which was 2.45 times higher than that of the one-step method. The efficiency of hydrogen-ethanol co-production was 17.79 %, which was 2.76 times more efficient than hydrogen compared to fermentation with hydrogen. The result provides technical reference for the high-quality utilization of CS.

Research projects, initiatives and conferences that include patients as partners rather than as participants are becoming more common. Including patients as partners (what we will call \'patient partners\') is an approach called patient engagement or involvement in research, and we will call it patient engagement throughout this paper. Patient engagement moves traditional health research conferences and events to include a broader audience for their knowledge exchange and community building efforts, beyond academics and healthcare professionals. However, there are few examples of conferences where patients are given the opportunity to fully lead. Our conference went beyond patient engagement - it was patient-led. Patient partners conceived, planned, and decided on all aspects of a virtual conference.We present the work and processes we undertook throughout 2023 to create and produce a free conference called \"PxP: For patients, by patients\" or PxP for short, with a tagline of \"Partnering to make research stronger.\" PxP was patient-led and about patient engagement in research rather than a specific disease or condition. PxP was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Institute of Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis. The PxP website, known as the PxP Hub, now houses the conference recordings along with resources about patient engagement in research. These resources were recommended by the PxP Steering Committee members, speakers, and others who attended the 2023 conference. Here we lead you through how the idea for PxP was generated; how the international patient partner Steering Committee was convened and supported; how PxP was brought to life over nine months; the PxP 3-day event and feedback collected to improve future efforts; trade-offs, challenges and learnings; and resources required to support this type of event. We close with what the future holds for PxP in 2024 and beyond.It\'s time to elevate patients into leadership roles for conferences and events, and we encourage you to adopt the PxP ethos by using or adapting our approach and resources to support your opportunity.

Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is the process by which patients and clinicians exchange information and preferences to come to joint healthcare decisions. Clinical dashboards can support SDM by collecting, distilling, and presenting critical information, such as patient-reported outcomes (PROs), to be shared at points of care and in between appointments. We describe the implementation strategies and outcomes of a multistakeholder collaborative process known as \"co-design\" to develop a PRO-informed clinical dashboard to support SDM for patients with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods: Across 14 sessions, two multidisciplinary teams comprising patients, care partners, clinicians, and other stakeholders iteratively co-designed an SDM dashboard for either advanced cancer (N = 25) or CKD (N = 24). Eligible patients, care partners, and frontline clinicians were identified by six physician champions. The co-design process included four key steps: (1) define \"the problem\", (2) establish context of use, (3) build a consensus on design, and (4) define and test specifications. We also evaluated our success in implementing the co-design strategy using measures of fidelity, acceptability, adoption, feasibility, and effectiveness which were collected throughout the process. Results: Mean (M) scores across implementation measures of the co-design process were high, including observer-rated fidelity and adoption of co-design practices (M = 19.1 on a 7-21 scale, N = 36 ratings across 9 sessions), as well as acceptability based on the perceived degree of SDM that occurred during the co-design process (M = 10.4 on a 0 to 12 adapted collaboRATE scale). Capturing the feasibility and adoption of convening multistakeholder co-design teams, min-max normalized scores (ranging from 0 to 1) of stakeholder representation demonstrated that, on average, 95% of stakeholder types were represented for cancer sessions (M = 0.95) and 85% for CKD sessions (M = 0.85). The co-design process was rated as either \"fully\" or \"partially\" effective by 100% of respondents, in creating a dashboard that met its intended objective. Conclusions: A co-design process was successfully implemented to develop SDM clinical dashboards for advanced cancer and CKD care. We discuss key strategies and learnings from this process that may aid others in the development and uptake of patient-centered healthcare innovations.

This case study describes the development of a patient facing app to aid the collection of accurate data for nursing assessment for care pathways. The project was led by service leads in co-production with a small supplier. Apps can be a user-friendly solution which enhance patient-centred care and significantly reduce service admin time. The impact shows that the innovation achieved to solve the problems identified at the outset. Digital health innovations are more successful with the engagement of users, and the authors want to encourage colleagues and services across the NHS to lead digital innovation in this case study.