Coproduction of public policy involves bringing together technical experts, practitioners, and people with lived experience of that policy to collaboratively and deliberatively codesign it. Coproduction can leverage different ways of knowing and evaluative perspectives on a policy area to enhance the legitimacy and efficaciousness of policymaking. This article argues that researcher reflexivity is crucial for getting the most out of coproduction ethically and epistemically. By reflecting on our positionality, habitus, and biases, we can gain new insights into how we affect the research design, production and analysis of data, and communication of findings. This reflexivity helps to disrupt power dynamics that underly research and policymaking, helping to realise the radical potential of coproduction to democratise practice, empower citizens, and make research more relational. We demonstrate the value of reflexivity through an analysis of our work coproducing a theory of thriving in financial hardship in partnership with the UK national anti-poverty charity Turn2us. We contextualise our advocacy for reflexivity within the practical realities of advancing coproduction in the UK today.

OBJECTIVE: Stroke survivors with aphasia (impaired language/communication) have poor outcomes and gaps in the clinical implementation of best practice contribute to this. Little is known, however, about speech pathologist perspectives on the touchpoints (key moments shaping experiences) in the clinical care pathway that have the greatest impact on service delivery nor how this varies by geographical location. We explored the experiences of speech pathologists who provide aphasia services to establish priorities for improvement and design.
METHODS: This is the initial experience gathering and priority identification stage of an experience-based co-design (EBCD) project. Speech pathologists were recruited from 21 geographically diverse Hospital and Health Services in Queensland, Australia. Speech pathologists working in acute, rehabilitation and community services shared positive and negative experiences of delivering aphasia care in interviews and focus groups. Experiential data were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis to determine touchpoints. Priorities for service design were identified using an adapted nominal group technique.
RESULTS: Speech pathologists (n = 62) participated in 16 focus groups and nine interviews and shared 132 experiences of delivering aphasia care. Providing care in teams with poor awareness of the impacts of aphasia was identified as a key challenge, as poor patient-provider communication was perceived to increase risk of adverse outcomes for patients. Speech pathologists identified areas for improvement related to their own professional needs (e.g., greater access to clinical supervision); collaborative health care (e.g., better coordination and interdisciplinary care to increase therapy time); and the service context and environment (e.g., psychological services able to support diverse communication needs).
CONCLUSIONS: Speech pathologist delivery of aphasia services could be improved through increased access to clinical supervision, opportunities for peer debriefing and interdisciplinary care. Priorities for service design varied by geographical location and included: education to support care transitions (remote areas), improved referral pathways and service linkage (regional areas) and dedicated aphasia staffing (metropolitan areas).
UNASSIGNED: A consumer advisory committee comprising people with aphasia (n = 3, authors K.M., K.D. and B.A.), their significant others (n = 2, authors J.D. and P.M.), and a Cultural Capability Officer (author G.B.) guided this research. The team: (1) reviewed participant information; (2) co-designed surveys and workshop resources; (3) copresented research outcomes and contributed to publications. Research questions and study design (e.g., analysis methods and assessment measures) were developed by the research team (authors L.A., V.J.P., D.A.C. and S.J.W.).

BACKGROUND: The mental health of young people (aged 16-25 years) is a growing public health concern in the United Kingdom due to the increasing numbers of young people experiencing mental health difficulties, with many not in contact with mental health services. To design services that meet the needs of all young people, a diversity of young people must be involved in mental health research, beyond being participants. This Delphi study aimed to identify different types of \'involvement\' and to define and describe \'under-representation\' in young people\'s involvement in mental health research.
METHODS: Twenty-seven experts in young people\'s mental health research completed a series of online questionnaires. The experts were academic researchers, patient and public involvement (PPI) professionals and young \'experts by experience\'. Round 1 generated panellists\' views on \'involvement\' and \'under-representation\'. Round 2 summarised panellists\' responses from Round 1 and sought consensus (minimum 70% agreement) in nine question areas. Round 3 validated the findings of the previous rounds.
RESULTS: Consensus was achieved in eight out of nine areas, resulting in a matrix (with definitions) of the different types of young people\'s involvement in mental health research, from being advisors to involvement ambassadors. The findings generated an agreed-upon definition of under-representation, an identification of when in the research process there is under-representation and the characteristics of the young people who are under-represented. Experts further agreed on demographic data that should be collected to improve reporting on involvement.
CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to our understanding of involvement and under-representation in the context of young people\'s mental health research through expert consensus. It provides a practical resource for researchers considering involving young people in the research process and suggests the data that should be collected to improve reporting on the diversity of the young people involved.
UNASSIGNED: A research oversight group of five young people advised on this study. They contributed throughout the project-from endorsing the research question to commenting on the findings and dissemination. Two of the group reviewed all participant materials and piloted the initial questionnaire.

There is increasing effort in science to support disaster risk management (DRM) and climate change adaptation in urban environments. It is now common for research calls and projects to reference coproduction methods and science uptake goals. This paper identifies lessons for researchers, research funders, and research users wishing to enable useful, useable, and used science based on the perspectives of research users in urban planning from low- and middle-income countries. DRM-supporting science is viewed by policy actors as: complicated and poorly communicated; presenting inadequate, partial, and outdated information; misaligned with policy cycles; and costly to access and inadequately positioned to overcome the policy barriers that hinder integration of DRM into urban planning. Addressing these specific concerns points to more systematic collection and organisation of data and enhancement of supporting administrative structures to facilitate better sight of human vulnerability and its link to development decision-making and wider processes of urban risk creation.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is common among adolescents and is a major public health concern. School staff may be the first adults to notice a young person\'s self-harm and are well placed to provide support or signpost students to help. However, school staff often report that they do not feel equipped or confident to support students. Despite the need, there is a lack of evidence-based training about self-harm for school staff. A web-based training program would provide schools with a flexible and cost-effective method of increasing staff knowledge, skills, and confidence in how to respond to students who self-harm.
OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to coproduce an evidence-based training program for school staff to improve their skills and confidence in responding to students who self-harm (Supportive Response to Self-Harm [SORTS]). This paper describes the design and development process of an initial prototype coproduced with stakeholders to ensure that the intervention meets their requirements.
METHODS: Using a user-centered design and person-based approach, the SORTS prototype was informed by (1) a review of research literature, existing guidelines, and policies; (2) coproduction discussions with the technical provider and subject matter experts (mental health, education, and self-harm); (3) findings from focus groups with young people; and (4) coproduction workshops with school staff. Thematic analysis using the framework method was applied.
RESULTS: Coproduction sessions with experts and the technical provider enabled us to produce a draft of the training content, a wireframe, and example high-fidelity user interface designs. Analysis of focus groups and workshops generated four key themes: (1) need for a training program; (2) acceptability, practicality, and implementation; (3) design, content, and navigation; and (4) adaptations and improvements. The findings showed that there is a clear need for a web-based training program about self-harm in schools, and the proposed program content and design were useful, practical, and acceptable. Consultations with stakeholders informed the iterative development of the prototype.
CONCLUSIONS: SORTS is a web-based training program for school staff to appropriately respond to students who self-harm that is based on research evidence and developed in collaboration with stakeholders. The SORTS program will equip school staff with the skills and strategies to respond in a supportive way to students who self-harm and encourage schools to adopt a whole-school approach to self-harm. Further research is needed to complete the intervention development based on the feedback from this study and evaluate the program\'s effectiveness. If found to be effective, the SORTS program could be implemented in schools and other youth organizations.

A female patient, known to have hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS), underwent several elective gastroscopies under sedation in different hospitals. Except for a single incident of mild laryngospasm during emergence, all procedures were uneventful. On that occasion, following the procedure in the postanesthesia care unit, the patient suffered severe airway obstruction, and standard airway rescue techniques exacerbated adequate ventilation. After the removal of all stimuli and maintaining only an indirect oxygen supply via a mask in front of her face, her airway improved, and the patient fully recovered after 17 minutes. After the gastroscopy, physical examination revealed that the patient had an extremely flexible trachea that could be completely moved outside the midline to the extreme right and left. For the subsequent procedures, an airway plan was developed in conjunction with the patient and resulted in uncomplicated perianesthetic care. This case report serves to alert readers to the risk of adverse airway events in patients with EDS and suggests an alternative approach to avoid such complications. When patients receive care in different hospitals, adequate documentation is essential and adequate preoperative assessment is crucial. This case study demonstrates the value of patient-coproduction care plans.

BACKGROUND: Finding enjoyable and effective long-term approaches to rehabilitation for improving the upper limb (UL) function of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) is challenging. Using virtual reality (VR) could be a solution to this challenge; however, there is a lack of reporting on the views of people with MS and clinicians on VR-based approaches and recommendations for games for rehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify common UL problems and their related current therapeutic approaches for people with MS, and to explore the opinions of people with MS and specialist clinicians on VR and obtain suggestions for the development and design of VR games.
METHODS: Separate focus groups were conducted with people with MS, recruited through the MS Society UK\'s research network, and clinicians, recruited through the MS Trust Therapists in MS network. A total of 10 people with MS (2 focus groups) and 8 clinicians (5 physiotherapists, 2 occupational therapists, and 1 MS nurse in 2 focus groups) were involved. The focus groups were recorded and transcriptions were analyzed using theme-based content analysis.
RESULTS: People with MS commonly reported that their UL problems interfered with activities of daily living and resulted in the loss of meaningful hobbies such as writing. Many people with MS neglected UL exercise and found strategies for adapting to the UL impairments. Similarly, clinicians stated UL rehabilitation was neglected within their service and that it was challenging to find interesting treatment strategies. VR was suggested by both participant groups as a solution, as it was convenient for people with MS to access and it could provide a more engaging and disguised approach to exercise. There were shared concerns with cybersickness and disengagement with using VR approaches. Both groups agreed games should be meaningful and adaptable for users but suggested different VR activities, with clinicians suggesting games directly reflecting activities of daily living and people with MS suggesting more abstract activities.
CONCLUSIONS: VR was well received by both people with MS and clinicians for UL rehabilitation. Recommendations were made for the development of VR rehabilitation games which are personalized and customizable for the varying abilities of people with MS.

This perspective emerged from ongoing dialogue among ecologists initiated by a virtual workshop in 2021. A transdisciplinary group of researchers and practitioners conclude that urban ecology as a science can better contribute to positive futures by focusing on relationships, rather than prioritizing urban structures. Insights from other relational disciplines, such as political ecology, governance, urban design, and conservation also contribute. Relationality is especially powerful given the need to rapidly adapt to the changing social and biophysical drivers of global urban systems. These unprecedented dynamics are better understood through a relational lens than traditional structural questions. We use three kinds of coproduction-of the social-ecological world, of science, and of actionable knowledge-to identify key processes of coproduction within urban places. Connectivity is crucial to relational urban ecology. Eight themes emerge from the joint explorations of the paper and point toward social action for improving life and environment in urban futures.

BACKGROUND: Innovations in coproduction are shaping public service reform in diverse contexts around the world. Although many innovations are local, others have expanded and evolved over time. We know very little, however, about the process of implementation and evolution of coproduction. The purpose of this study was to explore the adoption, implementation and assimilation of three approaches to the coproduction of public services with structurally vulnerable groups.
METHODS: We conducted a 4 year longitudinal multiple case study (2019-2023) of three coproduced public service innovations involving vulnerable populations: ESTHER in Jönköping Region, Sweden involving people with multiple complex needs (Case 1); Making Recovery Real in Dundee, Scotland with people who have serious mental illness (Case 2); and Learning Centres in Manitoba, Canada (Case 3), also involving people with serious mental illness. Data sources included 14 interviews with strategic decision-makers and a document analysis to understand the history and contextual factors relating to each case. Three frameworks informed the case study protocol, semi-structured interview guides, data extraction, deductive coding and analysis: the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, the Diffusion of Innovation model and Lozeau\'s Compatibility Gaps to understand assimilation.
RESULTS: The adoption of coproduction involving structurally vulnerable populations was a notable evolution of existing improvement efforts in Cases 1 and 3, while impetus by an external change agency, existing collaborative efforts among community organizations, and the opportunity to inform a new municipal mental health policy sparked adoption in Case 2. In all cases, coproduced innovation centred around a central philosophy that valued lived experience on an equal basis with professional knowledge in coproduction processes. This philosophical orientation offered flexibility and adaptability to local contexts, thereby facilitating implementation when compared with more defined programming. According to the informants, efforts to avoid co-optation risks were successful, resulting in the assimilation of new mindsets and coproduction processes, with examples of how this had led to transformative change.
CONCLUSIONS: In exploring innovations in coproduction with structurally vulnerable groups, our findings suggest several additional considerations when applying existing theoretical frameworks. These include the philosophical nature of the innovation, the need to study the evolution of the innovation itself as it emerges over time, greater attention to partnered processes as disruptors to existing power structures and an emphasis on driving transformational change in organizational cultures.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence that Technology Assisted Sexual Abuse (TASA) represents a serious problem for large numbers of children. To date, there are very few evidence-based interventions available to young people (YP) after they have been exposed to this form of abuse, and access to support services remains a challenge. Digital tools such as smartphones have the potential to increase access to mental health support and may provide an opportunity for YP to both manage their distress and reduce the possibility of further victimization. The current study explores the acceptability of a digital health intervention (DHI; the i-Minds app) which is a theory-driven, co-produced, mentalization-based DHI designed for YP aged 12-18 who have experienced TASA.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 YP recruited through Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services, a Sexual Assault Referral Centre and an e-therapy provider who had access to the i-Minds app as part of a feasibility clinical trial. Interviews focused on the acceptability and usability of i-Minds and were coded to themes based on the Acceptability of Healthcare Interventions framework.
RESULTS: All participants found the i-Minds app acceptable. Many aspects of the app were seen as enjoyable and useful in helping YP understand their abuse, manage feelings, and change behavior. The app was seen as usable and easy to navigate, but for some participants the level of text was problematic and aspects of the content was, at times, emotionally distressing at times.
CONCLUSIONS: The i-Minds app is useful in the management of TASA and helping change some risk-related vulnerabilities. The app was designed, developed and evaluated with YP who had experienced TASA and this may account for the high levels of acceptability seen.
BACKGROUND: The trial was registered on the ISRCTN registry on the 12/04/2022 as i-Minds: a digital intervention for young people exposed to online sexual abuse (ISRCTN43130832).