PloS one · 2026
The role of co-design and co-creation methodologies in research supporting older adults living with HIV: A scoping review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Su Esther, Sirisegaram Luxey, Singh Hardeep, Eaton Andrew D, Munce Sarah E P, Brown Paige, Navas Carolina, McKinlay Stuart, Zhabokritsky Alice, Kokorelias Kristina M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study aims to synthesize existing literature on co-design and co-creation methodologies that support older adults living with HIV and to identify opportunities and challenges for applying these approaches in geriatric HIV contexts.
METHODS: A protocol for this scoping review was published elsewhere; we also describe our methods below. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for scoping reviews guided our approach, including database searching, title/abstract and full-text screening, data extraction, and analysis. We followed PRISMA recommendations for evidence screening and selection.
RESULTS: Our search identified 2,734 records from databases and no articles from grey literature. Across included studies, we identified themes describing how co-design and co-creation are used with older adults living with HIV, along with persistent challenges in implementation. Co-designed digital interventions may be less accessible for older adults who have lower digital literacy or limited access to devices or internet, and participants often represent a subset of older adults who are more able to engage in workshops or interviews or who have lower health status. Advisory committee members emphasized the importance of diverse participation and attention to accessibility throughout the process.
CONCLUSIONS: This review synthesizes evidence on co-design and co-creation for older adults living with HIV and highlights implications for practice and future research participation and engagement in this population. Findings point to the need for clear processes, inclusive recruitment, and attention to digital access and support when implementing co-designed interventions in geriatric HIV care.
METHODS: A protocol for this scoping review was published elsewhere; we also describe our methods below. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for scoping reviews guided our approach, including database searching, title/abstract and full-text screening, data extraction, and analysis. We followed PRISMA recommendations for evidence screening and selection.
RESULTS: Our search identified 2,734 records from databases and no articles from grey literature. Across included studies, we identified themes describing how co-design and co-creation are used with older adults living with HIV, along with persistent challenges in implementation. Co-designed digital interventions may be less accessible for older adults who have lower digital literacy or limited access to devices or internet, and participants often represent a subset of older adults who are more able to engage in workshops or interviews or who have lower health status. Advisory committee members emphasized the importance of diverse participation and attention to accessibility throughout the process.
CONCLUSIONS: This review synthesizes evidence on co-design and co-creation for older adults living with HIV and highlights implications for practice and future research participation and engagement in this population. Findings point to the need for clear processes, inclusive recruitment, and attention to digital access and support when implementing co-designed interventions in geriatric HIV care.