A balancing act: navigating the nuances of co-production in mental health research

Abstract Background In the context of mental health research, co-production involves people with lived expertise, those with professional or academic expertise, and people with both of these perspectives collaborating to design and actualize research initiatives. In the literature, two dominant pers...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sophie Soklaridis, Holly Harris, Rowen Shier, Jordana Rovet, Georgia Black, Gail Bellissimo, Sam Gruszecki, Elizabeth Lin, Anna Di Giandomenico
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-03-01
Series:Research Involvement and Engagement
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-024-00561-7
Description
Summary:Abstract Background In the context of mental health research, co-production involves people with lived expertise, those with professional or academic expertise, and people with both of these perspectives collaborating to design and actualize research initiatives. In the literature, two dominant perspectives on co-production emerge. The first is in support of co-production, pointing to the transformative value of co-production for those involved, the quality of services developed through this process, as well as to broader system-level impacts (e.g. influencing changes in health system decision making, care practices, government policies, etc.). The second stance expresses scepticism about the capacity of co-production to engender genuine collaboration given the deeply ingrained power imbalances in the systems in which we operate. While some scholars have explored the intersections of these two perspectives, this body of literature remains limited. Main text This paper contributes to the literature base by exploring the nuances of co-production in health research. Using our mental health participatory action research project as a case example, we explore the nuances of co-production through four key values that we embraced: 1. Navigating power relations together 2. Multi-directional learning 3. Slow and steady wins the race 4. Connecting through vulnerability Conclusions By sharing these values and associated principles and practices, we invite readers to consider the complexities of co-production and explore how our experiences may inform their practice of co-production. Despite the inherent complexity of co-production, we contend that pursuing authentic and equitable collaborations is integral to shaping a more just and inclusive future in mental health research and the mental health system at large.
ISSN:2056-7529