Abstract
Background: Co-production is increasingly used in mental health research and clinical settings. Maze Out is a digital game co-produced by clinicians, patients with eating disorders (EDs), an art director with lived experience in EDs, and a game-developing company. Maze Out is based on everyday challenges when suffering from EDs and is currently being evaluated as a supplement tool in EDs treatment. Several studies on co-producing mental health interventions focus on design and effectiveness, but the experiences of those involved in the co-production process remain unexplored. An in-depth exploration of stakeholders’ experiences offers valuable insights into the impact of co-production on different groups and generates crucial knowledge for successful implementation.
Objectives: This study evaluated and explored the co-production process and the meaning that EDs patients, clinicians, and game designers attributed to their participation in the co-production of Maze Out. The objectives were to determine (1) how stakeholders experienced their collaboration in the co-production of Maze Out.; and (2) to what extent the stakeholders involved in developing Maze Out followed Cahn’s principles of equality, diversity, accessibility, and reciprocity.
Methods: Five stakeholders (two patients, two clinicians, and a game designer) who participated in the co-production completed semi-structured interviews. Two patients and one clinician’s diaries supplemented the interviews. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to interpret the data.
Results: The results of this study highlight the importance of building a common language between clinicians, patients, and other professionals involved in developing new forms of treatment and interventions. A recommendation for researchers and clinicians to implement co-production in the future is that Cahn’s principles: equality, reciprocity, accessibility, and diversity, serve as a strong foundation for successful co-production. In this study, three and partially one of the four Cahn’s principles about co-production were identified: equality, reciprocity, and accessibility. When applied in an ED context, these principles provided stakeholders with valuable insights, enriching practice-based knowledge, using the knowledge applicable to clinical practice, and demonstrating their crucial role in fostering effective co-production processes.
Objectives: This study evaluated and explored the co-production process and the meaning that EDs patients, clinicians, and game designers attributed to their participation in the co-production of Maze Out. The objectives were to determine (1) how stakeholders experienced their collaboration in the co-production of Maze Out.; and (2) to what extent the stakeholders involved in developing Maze Out followed Cahn’s principles of equality, diversity, accessibility, and reciprocity.
Methods: Five stakeholders (two patients, two clinicians, and a game designer) who participated in the co-production completed semi-structured interviews. Two patients and one clinician’s diaries supplemented the interviews. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to interpret the data.
Results: The results of this study highlight the importance of building a common language between clinicians, patients, and other professionals involved in developing new forms of treatment and interventions. A recommendation for researchers and clinicians to implement co-production in the future is that Cahn’s principles: equality, reciprocity, accessibility, and diversity, serve as a strong foundation for successful co-production. In this study, three and partially one of the four Cahn’s principles about co-production were identified: equality, reciprocity, and accessibility. When applied in an ED context, these principles provided stakeholders with valuable insights, enriching practice-based knowledge, using the knowledge applicable to clinical practice, and demonstrating their crucial role in fostering effective co-production processes.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 178 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Journal of Eating Disorders |
| Volume | 12 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 14 Nov 2024 |
Bibliographical note
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.Funder
The study is funded by TrygFonden, the Psychiatric Research Foundation, Region of Southern Denmark and, Helsefonden. The funding organizations are independent and have no involvement in the design, data collection or analysis of the current trial.Funding
The study is funded by TrygFonden, the Psychiatric Research Foundation, Region of Southern Denmark and, Helsefonden. The funding organizations are independent and have no involvement in the design, data collection or analysis of the current trial.
| Funders |
|---|
| TrygFonden |
