PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 31, 2026Health & Social Care in the Community0 citationsOpen Access

Co‐Design to Improve Palliative Care for LGBTIQ+ People: Evaluating the Development of eLearning

View Full Paper
MVMeaghan VoszMHMark HughesCCColleen Cartwright

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate the co-design process for developing an eLearning intervention to assist palliative care providers in understanding LGBTIQ+ needs.
  • Conducted semistructured qualitative interviews (n=11) with co-design team members (n=8) over a 10-month period from 2022 to 2023.
  • Employed thematic analysis to identify key themes in the co-design process.
  • Engaged diverse co-designers with lived and professional experiences relevant to palliative care.
  • Identified three main themes: shared goals among co-designers, successful facilitation of LGBTIQ+ participation, and substantial work required beyond meetings for intervention completion.
  • Highlighting constraints in co-design processes that require specialist facilitation and organizational support.
  • Emphasized the importance of transparent communication and effective facilitation to enhance co-design best practices.

Abstract

LGBTIQ+ people continue to experience barriers to accessing palliative care and poor palliative care outcomes, including fear of discrimination, risk of abuse and neglect, and having their end‐of‐life wishes unmet. While co‐design is increasingly being used to address the needs of minoritized communities, little is known about the processes of co‐designing programs to improve palliative care with LGBTIQ+ communities. This research evaluated a co‐design process used to develop an eLearning intervention to improve Australian palliative care providers’ awareness of the issues and needs of LGBTIQ+ people. Semistructured qualitative interviews ( n = 11) were conducted with co‐design team members ( n = 8), which explored their expectations and experiences of the process over 10 months from 2022 to 2023. Co‐designers were diverse people with a range of lived and professional experiences in palliative care–related roles. Thematic analysis identified three themes: co‐designers shared common goals, the facilitation process enabled the participation of LGBTIQ+ participants, and the substantial work required outside of co‐design meetings to complete the intervention design. The study highlighted conditions that constrain co‐design processes and the importance of specialist facilitation and organizational support to manage these conditions within tight time and funding limitations. Limitations to co‐design best practice can be mitigated by transparent and accountable communication with effective and supportive facilitation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Vosz et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1bd2ab5783ba022b6fe28fhttps://doi.org/10.1155/hsc/5532573
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Experiences of LGBT Patients and Family Members with Hospice and Palliative Care (TH352)2020 · 1 citations
  2. 2Development and evaluation of an LGBT+ education programme for palliative care interdisciplinary teams2021 · 17 citations
  3. 3Co-design: from expert- to user-driven ideas in public service design2019 · 345 citations
  4. 4Social Work Practice with LGBT Elders at End of Life: Developing Practice Evaluation and Clinical Skills Through a Cultural Perspective2015 · 40 citations
  5. 5Interactions between persons—Knowledge, decision making, and the co‐production of practice2019 · 29 citations