16th April, 2026

Lunchtime Webinar by Katrina Messiha
Becoming Participatory in Public Health: Theoretical Foundations and Practice of Co-creation

The PhD Participatory Research Network recently welcomed Katrina Messiha, a Social Scientist and a PhD Fellow (Amsterdam University Medical Center) for a lunchtime webinar on co-creation and participatory research in public health. The session was shaped by themes suggested by our network and brought together PhD researchers from the UK, Europe, Australia, South Africa, and beyond.

Katrina started by talking through some of the key terms we often hear in this space (e.g., participation, involvement, engagement, and co-creation) and why they do not mean the same thing. One of the clearest points was that these approaches can involve very different levels of collaboration and power-sharing, even if they’re sometimes used interchangeably. She also made a helpful distinction between qualitative research and co-creation, pointing out that co-creation is less about gathering people’s views and more about sharing decision-making.

A big theme throughout was the need to be careful and specific in how we use participatory approaches. Katrina spoke about some of the common issues in the field, like tokenism, fragmented practice. Rather than assuming it’s always the “right” approach, she encouraged us to think more critically about when it actually makes sense to use it. She also noted that the increased interest in co-creation has led to inconsistent and superficial applications, and emphasised that co-creation should not be viewed as a “universal solution”. Moreover, as researchers, we may assume more involvement is always better, but Katrina encouraged us to think more carefully about what level of involvement actually fits the project, the context, and the people involved.

Another big theme throughout Katrina’s talk was the importance of considering theory. One of the main messages was that participatory research often doesn’t make its theoretical foundations very visible. The main key takeaway message was: if we’re using theory, we should say so clearly, explain why, and show how it’s shaping what we do, and don’t just leave it in the background.

She also addressed the realities of how messy co-creation can be in practice. It doesn’t tend to follow neat steps, and instead relies a lot on relationships, trust, and flexibility, especially when working with marginalised communities. She shared examples from her University of Cambridge work on dementia and healthcare access, showing how participatory approaches can surface barriers that might otherwise be missed using traditional methods.

In the Q&A, we spoke about “insider researchers” (i.e., people researching topics they also have lived experience of) and how they fit within participatory approaches. Katrina described this as an open question, depending on the different “hats” a researcher holds, and suggested that greater representation can be a strength, but isn’t the same thing as co-creation on its own.

Curated tools, resources, and key readings kindly shared by Katrina:

• Health CASCADE (Marie Skłodowska Curie Innovative Training Networks project funded by the European Union) blog: https://healthcascade.eu/blog/
• Science of Co-creation ChatBot: https://healthcascade.eu/training/
• Co-creation Masterclass Episodes: https://healthcascade.eu/resources/recordings/

Overall, Katrina’s webinar was an incredibly insightful session for stepping back and thinking about the importance of carefully considering theoretical frameworks as part of the research process, and what participatory research actually looks like in reality. Thank you so much, Katrina for a fantastic talk!