A holistic and practical framework for evaluating research co-production: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro)

Abstract Background Co-production is an umbrella term used to describe the process of generating knowledge by bringing together researchers and those who will use research to work in partnership. Multiple benefits of research co-production have been hypothesized, and in some cases documented, in the academic and practice record. However, there are significant gaps in understanding how to evaluate the quality of co-production designs, processes, and results. This gap in knowledge undermines the value of co-production and co-producers. Methods Our research tests the relevance and utility of a novel research co-production evaluation framework: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro). Following a co-production approach ourselves, members of our team collaborated to develop study objectives, questions, analysis and results sharing strategies. We used a dyadic field-test design to simulate RQ + 4 Co-Pro evaluations amongst 18 independently recruited subject matter experts. We used standardized reporting templates and qualitative interviews to collect data from field-test participants, and thematic analysis and deliberative dialogue to analysis and interpret results. Results The field test surfaced unanimous support for the relevance and utility of RQ + 4 Co-Pro. Research participants shared opportunities for fine-tuning language and criteria within the prototype version, but also, for alternative uses and users of RQ + 4 Co-Pro. This data facilitated our deliberative revision and publication herein of a field-tested RQ + 4 Co-Pro Framework and Assessment Instrument. Conclusion Evaluation is necessary for understanding and improving co-production, and, for ensuring co-production delivers on its promise of better health, health equity, and general public good. RQ + 4 Co-Pro provides an immediately practical evaluation tool, and we invite co-producers and stewards of co-production – including the funders, publishers, and universities who increasingly claim to encourage socially relevant research – to adapt and experiment with RQ + 4 Co-Pro in their contexts.