成人共同创作者在共同创作过程中的情感和心理体验:健康 CASCADE 范围界定审查协议

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1186/s13643-024-02643-9
Lauren McCaffrey, Bryan McCann, Maria Giné-Garriga, Qingfan An, Greet Cardon, Sebastien François Martin Chastin, Rabab Chrifou, Sonia Lippke, Quentin Loisel, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Katrina Messiha, Mira Vogelsang, Emily Whyte, Philippa Margaret Dall
{"title":"成人共同创作者在共同创作过程中的情感和心理体验:健康 CASCADE 范围界定审查协议","authors":"Lauren McCaffrey, Bryan McCann, Maria Giné-Garriga, Qingfan An, Greet Cardon, Sebastien François Martin Chastin, Rabab Chrifou, Sonia Lippke, Quentin Loisel, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Katrina Messiha, Mira Vogelsang, Emily Whyte, Philippa Margaret Dall","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02643-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a growing investment in the use of co-creation, reflected by an increase in co-created products, services, and interventions. At the same time, a growing recognition of the significance of co-creators’ experience can be detected but there is a gap in the aggregation of the literature with regard to experience. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review is to uncover the breadth of existing empirical research on co-creation experience, how it has been defined and assessed, and its key emotional and psychological characteristics in the context of co-created products, services, or interventions among adults. The development of the search strategy was guided by the research question, Arksey, and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology guidelines, and through collaboration with members of the Health CASCADE consortium. The results of the search and the study inclusion process will be reported in full and presented both narratively and by use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) flow diagram. Comprehensive searches of relevant electronic databases (e.g. Scopus) will be conducted to identify relevant papers. Snowball searches to identify additional papers through included full-text papers will be done using the artificial intelligence tool, namely, Connected Papers. All review steps will involve at least two reviewers. Studies in English, Dutch, Chinese, Spanish, and French, published from the year 1970 onwards, will be considered. Microsoft Excel software will be used to record and chart extracted data. The resulting scoping review could provide useful insights into adult co-creators’ experience of participating in the co-creation process. An increased understanding of the role of emotional and psychological experiences of participating in co-creation processes may help to inform the co-creation process and lead to potential benefits for the co-creators and co-created outcome. 10.5281/zenodo.7665851.","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adult co-creators’ emotional and psychological experiences of the co-creation process: a Health CASCADE scoping review protocol\",\"authors\":\"Lauren McCaffrey, Bryan McCann, Maria Giné-Garriga, Qingfan An, Greet Cardon, Sebastien François Martin Chastin, Rabab Chrifou, Sonia Lippke, Quentin Loisel, Giuliana Raffaella Longworth, Katrina Messiha, Mira Vogelsang, Emily Whyte, Philippa Margaret Dall\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13643-024-02643-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is a growing investment in the use of co-creation, reflected by an increase in co-created products, services, and interventions. At the same time, a growing recognition of the significance of co-creators’ experience can be detected but there is a gap in the aggregation of the literature with regard to experience. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review is to uncover the breadth of existing empirical research on co-creation experience, how it has been defined and assessed, and its key emotional and psychological characteristics in the context of co-created products, services, or interventions among adults. The development of the search strategy was guided by the research question, Arksey, and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology guidelines, and through collaboration with members of the Health CASCADE consortium. The results of the search and the study inclusion process will be reported in full and presented both narratively and by use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) flow diagram. Comprehensive searches of relevant electronic databases (e.g. Scopus) will be conducted to identify relevant papers. Snowball searches to identify additional papers through included full-text papers will be done using the artificial intelligence tool, namely, Connected Papers. All review steps will involve at least two reviewers. Studies in English, Dutch, Chinese, Spanish, and French, published from the year 1970 onwards, will be considered. Microsoft Excel software will be used to record and chart extracted data. The resulting scoping review could provide useful insights into adult co-creators’ experience of participating in the co-creation process. An increased understanding of the role of emotional and psychological experiences of participating in co-creation processes may help to inform the co-creation process and lead to potential benefits for the co-creators and co-created outcome. 10.5281/zenodo.7665851.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02643-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02643-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

共同创造的产品、服务和干预措施越来越多,这反映出人们对利用共同创造的投入越来越大。与此同时,人们也越来越认识到共同创造者经验的重要性,但有关经验的文献汇总却存在空白。因此,本次范围界定综述的目的是揭示现有关于共创体验的实证研究的广度,如何定义和评估共创体验,以及在成人共创产品、服务或干预措施背景下共创体验的主要情感和心理特征。在研究问题、Arksey 和 O'Malley 的范围界定综述方法指南的指导下,并通过与 Health CASCADE 联合体成员的合作,制定了检索策略。我们将全面报告检索结果和研究纳入过程,并采用 "系统性综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目"(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Review,PRISMA-ScR)流程图进行叙述和展示。将对相关电子数据库(如 Scopus)进行全面检索,以确定相关论文。将使用人工智能工具 "连接论文"(Connected Papers)进行 "滚雪球 "式搜索,通过已收录的全文论文找出更多论文。所有审稿步骤都将至少有两名审稿人参与。将考虑 1970 年以后发表的英文、荷兰文、中文、西班牙文和法文研究报告。将使用 Microsoft Excel 软件对提取的数据进行记录和制表。由此产生的范围综述可以为成人共同创作者参与共同创作过程的经验提供有用的见解。进一步了解参与共同创造过程的情感和心理体验的作用可能有助于为共同创造过程提供信息,并为共同创造者和共同创造的成果带来潜在的益处。10.5281/zenodo.7665851.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Adult co-creators’ emotional and psychological experiences of the co-creation process: a Health CASCADE scoping review protocol
There is a growing investment in the use of co-creation, reflected by an increase in co-created products, services, and interventions. At the same time, a growing recognition of the significance of co-creators’ experience can be detected but there is a gap in the aggregation of the literature with regard to experience. Therefore, the purpose of this scoping review is to uncover the breadth of existing empirical research on co-creation experience, how it has been defined and assessed, and its key emotional and psychological characteristics in the context of co-created products, services, or interventions among adults. The development of the search strategy was guided by the research question, Arksey, and O’Malley’s scoping review methodology guidelines, and through collaboration with members of the Health CASCADE consortium. The results of the search and the study inclusion process will be reported in full and presented both narratively and by use of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) flow diagram. Comprehensive searches of relevant electronic databases (e.g. Scopus) will be conducted to identify relevant papers. Snowball searches to identify additional papers through included full-text papers will be done using the artificial intelligence tool, namely, Connected Papers. All review steps will involve at least two reviewers. Studies in English, Dutch, Chinese, Spanish, and French, published from the year 1970 onwards, will be considered. Microsoft Excel software will be used to record and chart extracted data. The resulting scoping review could provide useful insights into adult co-creators’ experience of participating in the co-creation process. An increased understanding of the role of emotional and psychological experiences of participating in co-creation processes may help to inform the co-creation process and lead to potential benefits for the co-creators and co-created outcome. 10.5281/zenodo.7665851.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
期刊最新文献
Choice of primary healthcare providers among population in urban areas of low- and middle-income countries-a protocol for systematic review of literature. Computer-assisted screening in systematic evidence synthesis requires robust and well-evaluated stopping criteria. Patient-related prognostic factors for function and pain after shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. The psychometric properties of instruments measuring ethical sensitivity in nursing: a systematic review. Barriers and facilitators to enrollment in pediatric clinical trials: an overview of systematic reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1