Cited by 292Service and Product InnovationMental Health and Patient InvolvementPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Contextualizing co-production of health care: a systematic literature review

Palumbo, Rocco·2016·International Journal of Public Sector Management

Abstract

Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to contextualize the concepts of “service co-production” and “value co-creation” to health care services, challenging the traditional bio-medical model which focusses on illness treatment and neglects the role played by patients in the provision of care. Design/methodology/approach: – For this purpose, the author conducted a systematic review, which paved the way for the identification of the concept of “health care co-production” and allowed to discuss its effects and implications. Starting from a database of 254 records, 65 papers have been included in systematic review and informed the development of this paper. Findings: – Co-production of health care services implies the establishment of co-creating partnerships between health care professionals and patients, which are aimed at mobilizing the dormant resources of the latter. However, several barriers prevent the full implementation of health care co-production, nurturing the application of the traditional bio-medical model. Practical implications: – Co-production of health care is difficult to realize, due to both health care professionals’ hostility and patients unwillingness to be involved in the provision of care. Nonetheless, the scientific literature is consistent in claiming that co-production of care paves the way for increased health outcomes, enhanced patient satisfaction, better service innovation, and cost savings. The establishment of multi-disciplinary health care teams, the improvement of patient-provider communication, and the enhancement of the use of ICTs for the purpose of value co-creation are crucial ingredients in the recipe for increased patient engagement. Originality/value: – To the knowledge of the author, this is the first paper aimed at systematizing the scientific literature in the field of health care co-production. The originality of this paper stems from its twofold relevance: on the one hand, it emphasizes the pros and the cons of health care co-production and, on the other hand, it provides with insightful directions to deal with the engagement of patients in value co-creation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/ijpsm-07-2015-0125

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Palumbo, R.
Affiliations
University of Salerno (IT)
Corresponding author
Palumbo, Rocco
Venue
International Journal of Public Sector Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2016-01-11
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
72-90
ISSN
0951-3558 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2231070912
Cited by
292
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 5
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Public Sector Management (publishedVersion)
  • Cineca Institutional Research Information System (Tor Vergata University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Keywords
value co-creation, service co-production, patient engagement, patient-provider communication, multidisciplinary healthcare teams, patient satisfaction, health outcomes, cost reduction, service innovation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review