Cited by 1,078Service and Product InnovationMental Health and Patient InvolvementPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare

Coproduction of healthcare service

Open access
Batalden, Maren, Batalden, Paul, Margolis, Peter, Seid, Michael, Armstrong, Gail, Opipari-Arrigan, Lisa, Hartung, Hans·2016·BMJ Quality & Safety

Abstract

Efforts to ensure effective participation of patients in healthcare are called by many names—patient centredness, patient engagement, patient experience. Improvement initiatives in this domain often resemble the efforts of manufacturers to engage consumers in designing and marketing products. Services, however, are fundamentally different than products; unlike goods, services are always ‘coproduced’. Failure to recognise this unique character of a service and its implications may limit our success in partnering with patients to improve health care. We trace a partial history of the coproduction concept, present a model of healthcare service coproduction and explore its application as a design principle in three healthcare service delivery innovations. We use the principle to examine the roles, relationships and aims of this interdependent work. We explore the principle's implications and challenges for health professional development, for service delivery system design and for understanding and measuring benefit in healthcare services.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004315

Cites

65 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Involving diverse stakeholders in intervention development has been recommended to enhance accuracy, fit, and sense of ownership within the specific setting.

    “When developing interventions, involving diverse stakeholders (e.g., patients, healthcare staff and their managers, researchers, and policy makers) has been recommended to enhance accuracy, fit, and sense of ownership within the specific setting [15, 16].”

    From Developing a primary care-based cognitive behavioral intervention for anxiety in children through a participatory approach: a qualitative study. (2026) · cites this paper as [15]

    The ‘Cocreating health in a learning network’ section describes patients, families, clinicians and researchers working as partners in a formal design process. ‘Contextualising standardisation’ also calls for adapting care to patient and family priorities. The paper does not establish that involving the full range of stakeholders listed—including managers and policy makers—in intervention development enhances accuracy or a sense of ownership. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [21]Sandström P A toolbox for co-production of knowledge and improved land use dialogues: the perspective of reindeer husbandry [ PhD Thesis]. Umeå, Sweden: Department of Forest Resource Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2015: 20.
  2. [22]Flood S Enhancing adaptive capacity through co-production of knowledge in New Zealand. Proceedings of the Resilient Cities 2014 congress; 5th Global Forum on Urban Resilience and Adaptation; Bonn, Germany, 29–31 May, 2014.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Batalden, M., Batalden, P., Margolis, P., Seid, M., Armstrong, G., Opipari-Arrigan, L., & Hartung, H.
Affiliations
  • Cambridge Health Alliance (US)
  • Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice (US)
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
  • College of Nursing, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA
  • Department of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
  • University Hospital Crosshouse (GB)
Corresponding author
Batalden, Maren
Venue
BMJ Quality & Safety
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2015-09-16
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
509-517
ISSN
  • 1475-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-5415
  • 2044-5423
OpenAlex
W2277370197
Cited by
1,078
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 68 · 2025: 84 · 2024: 149 · 2023: 92 · 2022: 130 · 2021: 139 · 2020: 120 · 2019: 91 · 2018: 94 · 2017: 72 · 2016: 38
FWCI
168.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Quality & Safety (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK085719)
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
patient engagement, patient-centered care, service design, service delivery innovation
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Patient Participation, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Models, Organizational, Quality Improvement

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