Protocol for a systematic review of living labs in healthcare
Open Access
- 5 February 2021
- Vol. 11 (2), e039246
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039246
Abstract
Introduction Healthcare is increasingly challenged to meet the demands of user involvement and knowledge mobilisation required by the 21st-century patient-centred and knowledge-based economies. Innovations are needed to reduce problematic barriers to knowledge exchange and improve collaborative problem solving. Living labs, as open knowledge systems, have the potential to address these gaps but are underexplored in healthcare. Methods and analysis We will conduct the first systematic review of living labs across healthcare contexts. We will comprehensively search the following online databases from inception to 31 December 2020: Scopus, the Cochrane Library (Wiley), Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), Web of Science, PsycINFO (OVID) and EBSCOhost databases including Academic Search Complete, Business Source Premier, Canadian Reference Centre, CINAHL, MasterFILE Premier, SPORTDiscus, Library & Information Science Source, Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts, AgeLine, EconLit, Art Full Text, Women’s Studies International and Social Work Abstracts. We will search for grey literature using Google advanced techniques and books/book chapters through scholarly and bibliographical databases. We will use a dual-reviewer, two-step selection process with pre-established inclusion criteria and limit to English language publications. Empirical studies of any design examining living lab development, implementation or evaluation in health or healthcare will be included. We will use the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for methodological quality appraisal and Covidence software for review management, and we will extract data on pre-established variables such as lab context and technological platforms. We will create evidence tables and analyse across variables such as focal aim and achievement of living lab principles, such as the use of cocreation and multimethod approaches. We will tabulate data for descriptive reporting and narrative synthesis to identify current applications, approaches and promising areas for living lab development across health contexts. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was not required for this review. This review will inform research into living labs in health environments, including guidance for a living lab in paediatric rehabilitation. Academic publications shared through collaborative networks and social media channels will provide substantive knowledge to the growing tech-health development sector and to researchers, practitioners and organisations seeking enhanced patient/stakeholder engagement and innovations in knowledge translation and evidence-based practice. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020175275Keywords
Funding Information
- University of Manitoba (University Research Grants Program 52519)
This publication has 28 references indexed in Scilit:
- Main motivation for installation of new living laboratory for healthPublished by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) ,2015
- Investigator TriangulationJournal of Mixed Methods Research, 2015
- The Development of a Classification Schema for Arts‐Based Approaches to Knowledge TranslationWorldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2014
- Actor roles and role patterns influencing innovation in living labsIndustrial Marketing Management, 2014
- Protocol for a systematic review of the use of narrative storytelling and visual-arts-based approaches as knowledge translation tools in healthcareSystematic Reviews, 2013
- Leveraging the “living laboratory”: On the emergence of the entrepreneurial hospitalSocial Science & Medicine, 2012
- Is it time to drop the ‘knowledge translation’ metaphor? A critical literature reviewJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 2011
- How Good Is the Quality of Health Care in the United States?The Milbank Quarterly, 2005
- Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health fieldJournal of Health Services Research & Policy, 2005
- Mixing Qualitative Methods: Quality Assurance or Qualitative Quagmire?Qualitative Health Research, 1998