Evaluating research co-production: protocol for the Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro) framework

Abstract

Background Research co-production is an umbrella term used to describe research users and researchers working together to generate knowledge. Research co-production is used to create knowledge that is relevant to current challenges and to increase uptake of that knowledge into practice, programs, products, and/or policy. Yet, rigorous theories and methods to assess the quality of co-production are limited. Here we describe a framework for assessing the quality of research co-production—Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro)—and outline our field test of this approach. Methods Using a co-production approach, we aim to field test the relevance and utility of the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework. To do so, we will recruit participants who have led research co-production projects from the international Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network. We aim to sample 16 to 20 co-production project leads, assign these participants to dyadic groups (8 to 10 dyads), train each participant in the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework using deliberative workshops and oversee a simulation assessment exercise using RQ+ 4 Co-Pro within dyadic groups. To study this experience, we use a qualitative design to collect participant demographic information and project demographic information and will use in-depth semi-structured interviews to collect data related to the experience each participant has using the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro framework. Discussion This study will yield knowledge about a new way to assess research co-production. Specifically, it will address the relevance and utility of using RQ+ 4 Co-Pro, a framework that includes context as an inseparable component of research, identifies dimensions of quality matched to the aims of co-production, and applies a systematic and transferable evaluative method for reaching conclusions. This is a needed area of innovation for research co-production to reach its full potential. The findings may benefit co-producers interested in understanding the quality of their work, but also other stewards of research co-production. Accordingly, we undertake this study as a co-production team representing multiple perspectives from across the research enterprise, such as funders, journal editors, university administrators, and government and health organization leaders.

Shining a light on the road towards conducting principle-based co-production research in rehabilitation

“…For example, the Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro) Framework ( 45 ), and for co-design, the Preferred Components for Co-design in Research (PRECISE) guideline ( 46 ). Having such approaches which aim to help evaluating the quality of participatory research can help both co-producers learn and improve their practice, and provide a greater methodological impetus for co-production research projects to be more widely accepted by funders ( 47 ).…”

Strategies for involving patients and the public in scaling initiatives in health and social services: A scoping review

“…Reaching a consensus on scaling terms both in scientific publishing and for lay people may help the dialogue and provide further incentive for PPI in scaling initiatives. Also, PPI requires time and funding 74 that is often not anticipated, involving planning, infrastructure, training, resources, and other contextual factors 75 …”