MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393011516 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078950

Co-creating a new Charter for equitable and inclusive co-creation: insights from an international forum of academic and lived experience experts

2024· review· en· W4393011516 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gillian Mulvale, Sandra Moll, Michelle Phoenix, Alexis Buettgen, Bonnie Freeman, Louise Murray‐Leung, Samantha Micsinszki, Lulwama Mulalu, Alexa Vrzovski, Christina Foisy

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthToronto Metropolitan UniversityMental Health Research CanadaAssembly of First NationsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineCharterLived experiencePublic healthMedical educationPublic relationsEngineering ethicsNursingLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Co-creation approaches, such as co-design and co-production, aspire to power-sharing and collaboration between service providers and service users, recognising the specific insights each group can provide to improve health and other public services. However, an intentional focus on equity-based approaches grounded in lived experience and epistemic justice is required considering entrenched structural inequities between service-users and service-providers in public and institutional spaces where co-creation happens. OBJECTIVES: This paper presents a Charter of tenets and principles to foster a new era of 'Equity-based Co-Creation' (EqCC). METHODS: The Charter is based on themes heard during an International Forum held in August 2022 in Ontario, Canada, where 48 lived experience experts and researchers were purposively invited to deliberate challenges and opportunities in advancing equity in the co-creation field. RESULTS: The Charter's seven tenets-honouring worldviews, acknowledging ongoing and historical harms, operationalising inclusivity, establishing safer and brave spaces, valuing lived experiences, 'being with' and fostering trust, and cultivating an EqCC heartset/mindset-aim to promote intentional inclusion of participants with intersecting social positions and differing historic oppressions. This means honouring and foregrounding lived experiences of service users and communities experiencing ongoing structural oppression and socio-political alienation-Black, Indigenous and people of colour; disabled, Mad and Deaf communities, women, 2S/LGBTQIA+ communities, people perceived to be mentally ill and other minoritised groups-to address epistemic injustice in co-creation methodologies and practice, thereby providing opportunities to begin to dismantle intersecting systems of oppression and structural violence. CONCLUSIONS: Each Charter tenet speaks to a multilayered, multidimensional process that is foundational to shifting paradigms about redesigning our health and social systems and changing our relational practices. Readers are encouraged to share their reactions to the Charter, their experiences implementing it in their own work, and to participate in a growing international EqCC community of practice.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.064
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0640.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0330.060
Scholarly communication0.0350.018
Open science0.0040.029
Research integrity0.0050.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.470
GPT teacher head0.632
Teacher spread0.162 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207