Tackling wicked problems in infection prevention and control: a guideline for co-creation with stakeholders
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Infection prevention and control can be seen as a wicked public health problem as there is no consensus regarding problem definition and solution, multiple stakeholders with different needs and values are involved, and there is no clear end-point of the problem-solving process. Co-creation with stakeholders has been proposed as a suitable strategy to tackle wicked problems, yet little information and no clear step-by-step guide exist on how to do this. The objectives of this study were to develop a guideline to assist developers in tackling wicked problems using co-creation with stakeholders, and to apply this guideline to practice with an example case in the field of infection prevention and control. METHODS: A mixed-method approach consisting of the integration of both quantitative and qualitative research was used. Relevant stakeholders from the veterinary, human health, and public health sectors were identified using a literature scan, expert recommendations, and snowball sampling. The stakeholder salience approach was used to select key stakeholders based on 3 attributes: power, legitimacy, and urgency. Key values of stakeholders (N = 20) were derived by qualitative semi-structured interviews and quantitatively weighted and prioritized using an online survey. RESULTS: Our method showed that stakeholder identification and analysis are prerequisites for understanding the complex stakeholder network that characterizes wicked problems. A total of 73 stakeholders were identified of which 36 were selected as potential key stakeholders, and only one was seen as a definite stakeholder. In addition, deriving key stakeholder values is a necessity to gain insights into different problem definitions, solutions and needs stakeholders have regarding the wicked problem. Based on the methods used, we developed a step-by-step guideline for co-creation with stakeholders when tackling wicked problems. CONCLUSIONS: The mixed-methods guideline presented here provides a systematic, transparent method to identify, analyze, and co-create with stakeholders, and to recognize and prioritize their values, problem definitions, and solutions in the context of wicked problems. This guideline consists of a general framework and although it was applied in an eHealth context, may be relevant outside of eHealth as well.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
A stakeholder analysis is often conducted but hardly ever included in publications.
“An example of this is a stakeholder analysis, which is often conducted but hardly ever included in publications [135].”
From Methods for Human-Centered eHealth Development: Narrative Scoping Review (2022) · cites this paper as [135]
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
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · see citing works
(2010) · Cited by 24,023 · see citing works
Dilemmas in a general theory of planning
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01405730 · Cited by 16,338 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Considering the fact that stakeholders have different views on the problem and its solution [2, 4], stakeholders will have different important insights to contribute.”
BackgroundInfluentialGlobal trends in emerging infectious diseases
Jones, K. E., Patel, N. G., Levy, M. A., Storeygard, A., Balk, D., Gittleman, J. L., & Daszak, P. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06536 · Cited by 8,338 · see citing works
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259247 · Cited by 5,039 · see citing works
Wright, K. B. (2006) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x · Cited by 2,550 · see citing works
What to do when Stakeholders matter: <b>Stakeholder Identification and Analysis Techniques</b>
Bryson, J. M. (2004) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719030410001675722 · Cited by 1,426 · see citing works
Wicked Problems, Knowledge Challenges, and Collaborative Capacity Builders in Network Settings
Weber, E. P., & Khademian, A. M. (2008) · Public Administration Review · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00866.x · Cited by 1,186 · see citing works
A Holistic Framework to Improve the Uptake and Impact of eHealth Technologies
van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E., Nijland, N., van Limburg, M., Ossebaard, H. C., Kelders, S. M., Eysenbach, G., & Seydel, E. R. (2011) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1672 · Cited by 1,126 · see citing works
Zika Virus in the Americas — Yet Another Arbovirus Threat
Fauci, A. S., & Morens, D. M. (2016) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmp1600297 · Cited by 1,075 · see citing works
Why Innovation in Health Care Is So Hard
Walker, A. (2006) · Harvard business review · Cited by 380 · see citing works
The Delphi method: a powerful tool for strategic management
Loo, R. (2002) · Policing An International Journal · doi:10.1108/13639510210450677 · Cited by 349 · see citing works
Understanding Wicked Problems: A Key to Advancing Environmental Health Promotion
Kreuter, M. W., Rosa, C. T. D., Howze, E. H., & Baldwin, G. T. (2004) · Health Education & Behavior · doi:10.1177/1090198104265597 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Designing eHealth that Matters via a Multidisciplinary Requirements Development Approach
Van Velsen, L., Wentzel, J., & Van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E. (2013) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/resprot.2547 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Co-design and implementation research: challenges and solutions for ethics committees
Goodyear-Smith, F., Jackson, C., & Greenhalgh, T. (2015) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-015-0072-2 · Cited by 247 · see citing works
Why Business Modeling is Crucial in the Development of eHealth Technologies
van Limburg, M., van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E., Nijland, N., Ossebaard, H. C., Hendrix, R. M., & Seydel, E. R. (2011) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.1674 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
Self-citationWhy innovation in health care is so hard.
Herzlinger, R. E. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Tackling 'wicked' health promotion problems: a New Zealand case study
Signal, L. N., Walton, M., Mhurchú, C. N., et al. (2012) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/das006 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Yassi, A., Moore, D. M., FitzGerald, J. M., Bigelow, P., Hon, C., & Bryce, E. (2005) · Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.jom.0000150207.18085.41 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Emerging Zoonoses: the “One Health Approach”
Rabozzi, G., Bonizzi, L., Crespi, E., Somaruga, C., Sokooti, M., Tabibi, R., Vellere, F., Brambilla, G., & Colosio, C. (2012) · Safety and Health at Work · doi:10.5491/shaw.2012.3.1.77 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
“Wicked Problems,” Public Policy, and Administrative Theory
Durant, R. F., & Legge, J. S. (2006) · Administration & Society · doi:10.1177/0095399706289713 · Cited by 89 · see citing works
Participatory eHealth development to support nurses in antimicrobial stewardship
Wentzel, J., van Velsen, L., van Limburg, M., de Jong, N., Karreman, J., Hendrix, R., & van Gemert-Pijnen, J. J. E. W. C. (2014) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/1472-6947-14-45 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Self-citationvan Limburg, M., Wentzel, J., Sanderman, R., & van Gemert-Pijnen, L. (2015) · JMIR Research Protocols · doi:10.2196/resprot.4519 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Ng, V., & Sargeant, J. M. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029752 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Stakeholder prioritization of zoonoses in Japan with analytic hierarchy process method
Kadohira, M., HILL, G., Yoshizaki, R., et al. (2014) · Epidemiology and Infection · doi:10.1017/s0950268814002246 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
van Limburg, M., Sinha, B. N. M., Lo-Ten-Foe, J. R., et al. (2014) · Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control · doi:10.1186/2047-2994-3-33 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Co‐creating value in research: stakeholders' perspectives
Janamian, T., Jackson, C. L., & Dunbar, J. (2014) · The Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/mja14.00273 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Of mice and men: defining, categorizing and understanding the significance of zoonotic infections
Παππάς, Γ. (2010) · Clinical Microbiology and Infection · doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03444.x · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Emerging zoonoses : Early warning and surveillance in the Netherlands
Jwb, V. D. G., Aw, V. D. G., & Mah, B. (2010) · Rivm Repository (Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment) · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Context analysis for epidemic control in the Netherlands
Luigjes-Huizer, Y. L., Kraaij‐Dirkzwager, M., Timen, A., et al. (2014) · Health Policy · doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.10.004 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
September 11, 2001. A CEO's story.
Greenberg, J. W. (2002) · PubMed · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Economische gevolgen van de uitbraak van Q-koorts: eindrapport
Tempelman, C., Prins, J., & Koopmans, C. (2011) · UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [30]Henskens FA, Paul DJ, Wallis M, Bryant J, Carey M, Fradgley E, Koller CE, Paul CL, Sanson-Fisher RW, Zucca A. How do health researchers benefit from web-based survey systems? In: 6th International Conference on e-Health; Lisbon, Portugal. IADIS Press. 2014. p. 254–62.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Asbjørnsen, R. A., Wentzel, J., Smedsrød, M. L., Hjelmesæth, J., Clark, M. M., Solberg Nes, L., & Van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E. W. C. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/22598 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Methods for Human-Centered eHealth Development: Narrative Scoping Review
Kip, H., Keizer, J., da Silva, M. C., Beerlage-de Jong, N., Köhle, N., & Kelders, S. M. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/31858 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Methods for Human-Centered eHealth Development: Narrative Scoping Review (Preprint)
Kip, H., Keizer, J., da Silva, M. C., Beerlage-de Jong, N., Köhle, N., & Kelders, S. M. (2021) · doi:10.2196/preprints.31858 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Kip, H., Kelders, S. M., Bouman, Y. H. A., & van Gemert-Pijnen, L. J. E. W. C. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/12972 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Breeman, L. D., Keesman, M., Atsma, D. E., Chavannes, N. H., Janssen, V., van Gemert-Pijnen, L., Kemps, H., Kraaij, W., Rauwers, F., Reijnders, T., et al. (2021) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104364 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Beerlage-de Jong, N., Van Gemert-Pijnen, L., Wentzel, J., Hendrix, R., & Siemons, L. (2017) · Infectious Disease Reports · doi:10.4081/idr.2017.6829 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationLentferink, A., Polstra, L., D’Souza, A., Oldenhuis, H., Velthuijsen, H., & van Gemert-Pijnen, L. (2020) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/s12911-020-1088-1 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- van Woezik, A. F. G., Braakman-Jansen, L. M. A., Kulyk, O., Siemons, L., & van Gemert-Pijnen, J. E. W. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Twente (NL)
- Venue
- Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control
- Published
- 2016-05-21
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 20-20
- ISSN
- 2047-2994 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4875594
- OpenAlex
- W2399200126
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 5.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- University of Twente Research Information (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- ZonMw (522001006)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Keywords
- infection control, wicked problems, co-creation, stakeholder engagement, stakeholder identification, stakeholder value, stakeholder salience, intersectoral collaboration, veterinary public health, human health, e-health, guideline development
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
