Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2026
A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
Minimum standards for co-design in public health research: Results from a double consensus process
Carmen Vargas1, Rebecca Bennett1, Cindy Needham1
1Deakin Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin Centre for Global Preventive Health and Nutrition, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Objectives:
To establish consensus-based minimum standards for co-design in public health research to strengthen equity, transparency, and accountability.
Study Design:
A double-consensus approach combining virtual Nominal Group Technique (NGT) workshops with a two-round modified Delphi survey involving researchers experienced in co-design.
Methods:
Two online NGT workshops were conducted to generate and prioritise items, producing 179 ideas that were consolidated into 48 survey statements. These were rated across two Delphi rounds, with items retained if ≥ 85% of participants scored them 6 or 7 on a seven-point Likert scale. Quantitative ratings and brief qualitative comments informed iterative refinement.
Results:
The 2 workshops generated 179 unique ideas, distilled into 44 survey items and 4 more were added after Round 1 survey. The Delphi process engaged 61 participants in Round 1 and 34 in Round 2. Consensus was reached on 31 (67%) out of 48 items, including 11 (69%) critical principles (e.g., inclusivity, transparent communication, accessibility, and relationship building), 7 (78%) required co-design steps (e.g., clear purpose, early and sustained interest-holder engagement, iterative design), 8 (57%) criteria for evaluating co-design processes (e.g., equity, integration, clarity, and ethical standards), and 5 (55%) essential follow-up actions (e.g., outcome dissemination, sustainability planning).
Conclusions:
Consensus-based minimum standards for co-design can strengthen conceptual integrity and methodological rigour in participatory public health research. By enhancing clarity, transparency and comparability in co-design practice, these standards may be promoted to guide researchers, practitioners and funders towards more effective and equitable public health interventions.
Related Concept Videos
01:20Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies.
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
01:11Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care evaluation by...
01:56Ethics in Research
01:29Bias in Epidemiological Studies
01:15Study Design in Statistics
Does aspirin reduce the risk of heart attacks? Is one brand of fertilizer more effective at growing roses than another? Is fatigue as dangerous to a driver as the influence of alcohol? Questions like these are answered using randomized experiments with proper...