Bridging the gap: mapping co-creation methods for public health impact and innovation

Abstract Background Co-creation offers a promising approach to public health innovation, particularly for tackling complex issues. However, the lack of a standardized methodology limits its reliability and reproducibility, especially across diverse contexts. This study explores co-creation methods used by researchers and practitioners, aiming to shed light on their implications for public health. Understanding this methodological landscape can enhance the effective implementation of co-creation processes to address complex challenges. Methods Utilizing the Systematic Methods Overview approach, we examined co-creation methods. Data were gathered from the Health CASCADE Co-Creation Database and grey literature using an artificial intelligence-assisted recursive search strategy and a two-step screening process. We conducted textual, comparative, and bibliometric analyses to evaluate methodological underpinnings and relationships between methods. Results Analysis of 2,627 academic articles and grey literature sources identified over 900 co-creation methods. While surveys, focus groups, and group discussions were prevalent, participatory methods were underutilized. Notably, 91.3% of methods co-occurred, with a predominant combination of qualitative approaches. Furthermore, a significant discrepancy between research and practice was evident, with only 10.2% convergence. Conclusions This study revealed a critical gap between co-creation in research and practice, emphasizing the need to bridge this methodological divide for advancing co-creation as a reliable approach in public health. The over-reliance on qualitative methods raises concerns about tokenistic engagement and undermines meaningful public participation in co-creation. Addressing this trend is vital to preserve the essence of true co-creation and maximize its potential for addressing complex public health challenges. Key messages • Mapping the diverse methods of co-creation in public health reveals both richness and disparities in approach, from surveys to participatory methods. • Addressing the discrepancy between co-creation in research and practice is vital for establishing a reliable and effective approach to tackling public health challenges.