The Possibilities and Limits of "Co-producing" Research

Area of Science:

• Health Services Research
• Sociology of Health and Illness
• Research Policy

Background:

• Growing interest in "co-produced" research, particularly the UK's National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) adoption of the term.
• Concerns that traditional patient and public involvement (PPI) in health research is often "tokenistic" and perpetuates power imbalances.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore the concept of co-production in health research.
• To analyze how the institutionalization of PPI leads to dominant consumer, managerial, and performative logics.
• To identify how co-production offers possibilities to overcome limitations in current PPI.

Main Methods:

• Perspective paper analyzing the discourse around co-production and PPI.
• Examination of the institutionalization of PPI and its inherent logics and practices.
• Discussion of how co-production can offer alternative discursive repertoires.

Main Results:

• The institutionalization of PPI often results in dominant consumer, managerial, and performative practices, limiting PPI scope.
• These dominant practices can lead to "recalcitrance" and "impression management" among lay contributors.
• Co-production presents alternative discursive possibilities but is constrained by existing structures.

Conclusions:

• Co-production in health research holds potential to move beyond the limitations of traditional PPI.
• Realizing co-production's potential requires understanding and addressing the historical and structural constraints of PPI.
• Further exploration is needed to navigate the complexities of implementing genuine co-production in health research.