Measuring co-design in global health research: methodological challenges and decolonial innovations

Area of Science:

• Implementation Science
• Global Health Research
• Health Equity

Background:

• Co-design is vital in global health implementation science.
• Current evaluation methods are often poor quality and can perpetuate power imbalances between high-income and low-income countries.
• The term co-design is sometimes misused to mask inequitable research practices.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically examine current co-design evaluation tools in implementation science.
• To highlight innovative measurement approaches for decolonizing global health.
• To advance the evaluation of equity, power sharing, and knowledge democratization in co-design.

Main Methods:

• Review of current implementation science evaluation tools.
• Identification of methodological innovations in measuring co-design.
• Analysis of trends and examples in decolonizing global health research.

Main Results:

• Five key methodological innovations for measuring co-design were identified: theory-informed evaluation, co-developed tools, data triangulation, expanded impact metrics, and feedback loops/adaptive measurement.
• These innovations move beyond simple metrics like attendance and satisfaction.
• The identified methods aim to assess the equity and power dynamics within co-design processes.

Conclusions:

• Methodological innovation is urgently needed to improve co-design evaluation in global health.
• Redefining measurement practices can help achieve equity, power sharing, and knowledge democratization.
• These innovations offer a pathway to decolonize global health research and practice.