Abstract:Plain English summaryCo-producing research with members of the public is increasingly recognised as a valuable process. Yet, despite these good intentions, the literature on coproduction has struggled to keep pace with the coproduction ‘movement’. There is a lack of clarity regarding acceptable levels of involvement and attempts at standardising approaches appear generic and lack detail. Moreover, relatively little research has captured the views of all the parties involved (academics, service providers and service users).We conducted interviews with all those involved in developing a new online service for depression in Northern Ireland. Our main questions related to how these three very different groups of people worked together over a two-year period to design, develop and deliver the service (e.g. what were the benefits? What would they do differently?)We found that early involvement was a key factor as this promoted equal ownership. There was also a need to be flexible and recognise other workload pressures. Interestingly, service providers and service users were keen to become more involved in data analysis – this is one of the most under-researched and reported areas within the coproduction literature. Finally, we considered how user involvement worked within complex research designs and how this could be improved. Based on this learning, the paper concludes with a simple 3-step framework that others may wish to follow in order to improve coproduction outcomes within interventions.AbstractBackgroundCo-production, involving members of the public in research, is increasingly encouraged by research funders. However, reports detailing involvement of the public in the entire research process from design, delivery, analysis and dissemination of findings are lacking. Furthermore, little is known about the lessons learnt from the perspective of the public and researchers; or more specifically lessons learnt when coproducing specific types of research projects, such as feasibility/pilot studies incorporating a randomised controlled trial (RCT) design. This paper aims to provide a more rounded picture of co-production based on the learning outcomes of researchers, their community partners and service users involved in a feasibility/pilot RCT study developing and evaluating an E-health Service for adults with depression.MethodsQualitative research incorporating 11 semi-structured interviews with academic team members (n = 4), community partners (n = 3) and service users with depression (n = 4) Data were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsKey factors for successful coproduction include - (1) early involvement at the pre-development stage, including contributing to the scientific grant application; (2) early identification of team strengths and expertise from the outset; (3) regular team meetings and contact (formal or informal) among coproduction partners; (4) a flexible and pragmatic approach to research design (particularly within RCTs); (5) shared decision making and responsibility and (6) recognition of ‘other’ pressures and providing support to each other. Findings also suggested further scope for involving community partners in data analysis and dissemination through co-authored papers. Those seeking to coproduce interventions or utilise RCT designs should consider tensions between data quality and intervention implementation and ethical issues regarding control groups.ConclusionThis paper confirms previous research confirming the benefits of coproduction. However, it also highlights a number of barriers, particularly when using complex research design, such as RCTs. Learning points are summarised in an implementation model for coproducing research. This model may provide a useful guide for considering activities associated with meaningful coproduction. We urge others to test this proposed model more widely in different areas of coproduced research.

Understanding needs and expectations to start effective communities of practice

Assessing communities of practice in health policy: a conceptual framework as a first step towards empirical research

Supporting Emerging Disciplines with e-Communities: Needs and Benefits

Using Focus Groups to Evaluate a Self-Assessment Approach to Coproduction Value Creation in an International Community of Practice: Phase 2 of the CO-VALUE Study

How to use communities of practice to support change in learning health systems: A landscape of roles and guidance for management

User Experience of the Co-design Research Approach in eHealth: Activity Analysis With the Course-of-Action Framework

Conducting a Community-Level Needs Assessment Through Dynamic Engagement With Stakeholders

Implementation of Virtual Communities of Practice in Healthcare to Improve Capability and Capacity: A 10-Year Scoping Review

Promoting sense of community in an early childhood care and education consortium

Enabling patients with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to identify and express their support needs to health care professionals: A qualitative study to develop a tool

Design of an online health-promoting community: negotiating user community needs with public health goals and service capabilities

Needs Assessment Planning: Starting Where You Are

Community-Partnered Research appraisal tool for conducting, reporting and assessing community-based research

Communities of practice: a model for their cultivation

Applied linguistics communities of practice: Improving the research-practice relationship

Supporting care home residents in the last year of life through 'Needs Rounds': Development of a pre-implementation programme theory through a rapid collaborative online approach

Developing an interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral community of practice in the domain of forests and livelihoods

Achieving successful community engagement: a rapid realist review

How successful was the use of a community of practice for the implementation of evidence-based practices for heart failure within the United States Department of Veterans Affairs: Insights from a formative evaluation

Measuring capacity building in communities: a review of the literature

Coproduction for feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trials: learning outcomes for community partners, service users and the research team