Using co‐creation and multi‐criteria decision analysis to close service gaps for underserved populations

Abstract

BackgroundNavigating treatment pathways remains a challenge for populations with complex needs due to bottlenecks, service gaps and access barriers. The application of novel methods may be required to identify and remedy such problems.ObjectiveTo demonstrate a novel approach to identifying persistent service gaps, generating potential solutions and prioritizing action.DesignCo‐creation and multi‐criteria decision analysis in the context of a larger, mixed methods study.Setting and participantsCommunity‐dwelling sample of older women living alone (OWLA), residing in Melbourne, Australia (n = 13‐37). Convenience sample of (n = 11) representatives from providers and patient organizations.InterventionsNovel interventions co‐created to support health, well‐being and independence for OWLA and bridge missing links in pathways to care.Main outcome measuresPerformance criteria, criterion weights , performance ratings, summary scores and ranks reflecting the relative value of interventions to OWLA.ResultsThe co‐creation process generated a list of ten interventions. Both OWLA and stakeholders considered a broad range of criteria when evaluating the relative merits of these ten interventions and a “Do Nothing” alternative. Combining criterion weights with performance ratings yielded a consistent set of high priority interventions, with “Handy Help,” “Volunteer Drivers” and “Exercise Buddies” most highly ranked by both OWLA and stakeholder samples.Discussion and conclusionsThe present study described and demonstrated the use of multi‐criteria decision analysis to prioritize a set of novel interventions generated via a co‐creation process. Application of this approach can add community voice to the policy debate and begin to bridge the gap in service provision for underserved populations.

Co‐creation of services to maintain independence and optimise well‐being: Learnings from Australia’s Older Women Living Alone (OWLA) project

“…The ‘decide’ sessions involved prioritising the co‐created services in line with their ‘value’ to OWLA using Multi‐Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). Methods and findings from this stage of the project are described in detail elsewhere (Mortimer et al, ).…”