BackgroundIn 2015, Amsterdam became part of the WHO Age Friendly City community, thereby accepting the responsibility to work towards a more age friendly Amsterdam. To study senior citizens’ needs and wishes concerning the age friendliness of their neighbourhood, the municipality asked the Amsterdam University of Applied Science to set up two pilot projects in two neighbourhoods. Aim was to 1) gain insight in seniors’ views and wishes regarding an age friendly city, and 2) reflect on the experiences with working with senior co-researchers. MethodologyThe study followed a Participatory Action Research approach with research teams consisting of seniors as co-researchers and professional researchers. We chose two neighbourhoods with distinct characteristics: the Indische Buurt which is centrally located, vibrant, multicultural, and strongly gentrifying, and Buitenveldert, a suburban and spacious neighbourhood, with less facilities and a dominance of well-to-do senior citizens. In both areas, we recruited senior co-researchers to form the research teams. They generally lived in, or close to, the pilot neighbourhood, and varied in age and ethnical background. The aim was to put the co-researchers in the lead during the entire research process. However, it differed between the neighbourhoods which type of researcher was in the lead. As a team, they formulated the main research question, constructed a topic list for interviews with older citizens, convened the interviews, analysed the data, wrote the report, and presented the results. During the entire process, they were supported by professional researchers.Both research teams interviewed 40 senior citizens, who were recruited through the co-researchers’ networks, professional care organisations, neighbourhood communities, and local media. We intended to gather a sample representative for the neighbourhood population. In the Indische Buurt, this proved to be difficult, since the relatively large Turkish and Moroccan communities were difficult to get into contact with, and it was hard to find co-researchers from those communities who could have provided a way in. Process and outcomesWe will share some of the results, but we will mainly reflect on the research process. ProcessRegarding the process, we found some differences between the two neighbourhoods. In the Indische Buurt, it took much effort to find co-researchers, since the seniors we encountered said to be too busy with other neighbourhood activities. We did recruit a small group of four co-researchers of different ethnical background, but sadly lacking Turkish and Moroccan seniors. They started with a very limited research experience and experienced ownership, which greatly increased during the process. At the finalisation of the project, the group ceased to be, but the outcomes were followed up by existing groups and organisations in the neighbourhood.In Buitenveldert, a large group of co-researchers was recruited in no-time, bearing more resemblance to an action group than a research group. They were generally highly educated and some already had research experience. The group proved to be pro-active, had a strong feeling of ownership, and worked in constant collaboration with the ‘professional’ researchers, respecting each other’s knowledge and skills. At the finalisation of the project, the group remained active as partner of the local government. OutcomesConcerning the content of the outcomes, we found some expected differences and unexpected similarities. For instance, we expected to find different outcomes concerning housing and facilities between the neighbourhoods. Indeed, in Buitenveldert, housing was already age friendly whereas facilities were scarce and geographically far apart. Yet, in the Indische Buurt, housing was poorly equipped for physically impaired seniors, but facilities were abundant and close by.We also found that, in both neighbourhoods, senior citizens were reluctant to share their limitations and ask for support, despite differences in neighbourhood, ethnicity, age etc. Of course, this can be expected of seniors from the ‘silent generation’. However, they seemingly shared these emotions more easily with their peers than with professional researchers. ConclusionThe social-cultural context of the neighbourhood impacts the research process. Overall, co-research appears to be a fruitful method to involve senior citizens in decisions concerning the improvement of their neighbourhood. Aims and content of the workshopWe aim to:• present our reflections on the participative process of working with senior co-researchers in Amsterdam• exchange and discuss with the participants of the workshop the lessons learned on how to facilitate citizens’ participation in the community• discuss similar and future projects and possibilities for collaboration among the participants of the workshopContent of the workshop• Presentation• Exchange and discussion in small groups • Plenary discussion on possible collaboration projects aiming to enhance citizens’ participation in the community
BackgroundIn 2015, Amsterdam became part of the WHO Age Friendly City community, thereby accepting the responsibility to work towards a more age friendly Amsterdam. To study senior citizens’ needs and wishes concerning the age friendliness of their neighbourhood, the municipality asked the Amsterdam University of Applied Science to set up two pilot projects in two neighbourhoods. Aim was to 1) gain insight in seniors’ views and wishes regarding an age friendly city, and 2) reflect on the experiences with working with senior co-researchers. MethodologyThe study followed a Participatory Action Research approach with research teams consisting of seniors as co-researchers and professional researchers. We chose two neighbourhoods with distinct characteristics: the Indische Buurt which is centrally located, vibrant, multicultural, and strongly gentrifying, and Buitenveldert, a suburban and spacious neighbourhood, with less facilities and a dominance of well-to-do senior citizens. In both areas, we recruited senior co-researchers to form the research teams. They generally lived in, or close to, the pilot neighbourhood, and varied in age and ethnical background. The aim was to put the co-researchers in the lead during the entire research process. However, it differed between the neighbourhoods which type of researcher was in the lead. As a team, they formulated the main research question, constructed a topic list for interviews with older citizens, convened the interviews, analysed the data, wrote the report, and presented the results. During the entire process, they were supported by professional researchers.Both research teams interviewed 40 senior citizens, who were recruited through the co-researchers’ networks, professional care organisations, neighbourhood communities, and local media. We intended to gather a sample representative for the neighbourhood population. In the Indische Buurt, this proved to be difficult, since the relatively large Turkish and Moroccan communities were difficult to get into contact with, and it was hard to find co-researchers from those communities who could have provided a way in. Process and outcomesWe will share some of the results, but we will mainly reflect on the research process. ProcessRegarding the process, we found some differences between the two neighbourhoods. In the Indische Buurt, it took much effort to find co-researchers, since the seniors we encountered said to be too busy with other neighbourhood activities. We did recruit a small group of four co-researchers of different ethnical background, but sadly lacking Turkish and Moroccan seniors. They started with a very limited research experience and experienced ownership, which greatly increased during the process. At the finalisation of the project, the group ceased to be, but the outcomes were followed up by existing groups and organisations in the neighbourhood.In Buitenveldert, a large group of co-researchers was recruited in no-time, bearing more resemblance to an action group than a research group. They were generally highly educated and some already had research experience. The group proved to be pro-active, had a strong feeling of ownership, and worked in constant collaboration with the ‘professional’ researchers, respecting each other’s knowledge and skills. At the finalisation of the project, the group remained active as partner of the local government. OutcomesConcerning the content of the outcomes, we found some expected differences and unexpected similarities. For instance, we expected to find different outcomes concerning housing and facilities between the neighbourhoods. Indeed, in Buitenveldert, housing was already age friendly whereas facilities were scarce and geographically far apart. Yet, in the Indische Buurt, housing was poorly equipped for physically impaired seniors, but facilities were abundant and close by.We also found that, in both neighbourhoods, senior citizens were reluctant to share their limitations and ask for support, despite differences in neighbourhood, ethnicity, age etc. Of course, this can be expected of seniors from the ‘silent generation’. However, they seemingly shared these emotions more easily with their peers than with professional researchers. ConclusionThe social-cultural context of the neighbourhood impacts the research process. Overall, co-research appears to be a fruitful method to involve senior citizens in decisions concerning the improvement of their neighbourhood. Aims and content of the workshopWe aim to:• present our reflections on the participative process of working with senior co-researchers in Amsterdam• exchange and discuss with the participants of the workshop the lessons learned on how to facilitate citizens’ participation in the community• discuss similar and future projects and possibilities for collaboration among the participants of the workshopContent of the workshop• Presentation• Exchange and discussion in small groups • Plenary discussion on possible collaboration projects aiming to enhance citizens’ participation in the community
Perceptions and values of care professionals are critical in successfully implementing technology in health care. The aim of this study was threefold: (1) to explore the main values of health care professionals, (2) to investigate the perceived influence of the technologies regarding these values, and (3) the accumulated views of care professionals with respect to the use of technology in the future. In total, 51 professionals were interviewed. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was applied. All care professionals highly valued being able to satisfy the needs of their care recipients. Mutual inter-collegial respect and appreciation of supervisors was also highly cherished. The opportunity to work in a careful manner was another important value. Conditions for the successful implementation of technology involved reliability of the technology at hand, training with team members in the practical use of new technology, and the availability of a help desk. Views regarding the future of health care were mainly related to financial cut backs and with a lower availability of staff. Interestingly, no spontaneous thoughts about the role of new technology were part of these views. It can be concluded that professionals need support in relating technological solutions to care recipients' needs. The role of health care organisations, including technological expertise, can be crucial here.
Developing and realizing an innovative concept for the Active Aging campus in two years, where students, teachers, companies, residents of surrounding Campus neighborhoods will be invited to do exercise, sports, play, meet and participate. This includes, on the one hand, providing input with regard to a mobility-friendly design from an infrastructural perspective and, on the other hand, organizing activities that contribute to Healthy Aeging of the Zernike site and the city of Groningen. It is not only about having an Active Aging campus with an iconic image, but also about the process. In the process of realization, students, teachers, researchers, companies and residents from surrounding districts will be explicitly involved. This includes hardware (physical environment / infrastructure), software (social environment) and orgware (interaction between the two).
Developing a framework that integrates Advanced Language Models into the qualitative research process.Qualitative research, vital for understanding complex phenomena, is often limited by labour-intensive data collection, transcription, and analysis processes. This hinders scalability, accessibility, and efficiency in both academic and industry contexts. As a result, insights are often delayed or incomplete, impacting decision-making, policy development, and innovation. The lack of tools to enhance accuracy and reduce human error exacerbates these challenges, particularly for projects requiring large datasets or quick iterations. Addressing these inefficiencies through AI-driven solutions like AIDA can empower researchers, enhance outcomes, and make qualitative research more inclusive, impactful, and efficient.The AIDA project enhances qualitative research by integrating AI technologies to streamline transcription, coding, and analysis processes. This innovation enables researchers to analyse larger datasets with greater efficiency and accuracy, providing faster and more comprehensive insights. By reducing manual effort and human error, AIDA empowers organisations to make informed decisions and implement evidence-based policies more effectively. Its scalability supports diverse societal and industry applications, from healthcare to market research, fostering innovation and addressing complex challenges. Ultimately, AIDA contributes to improving research quality, accessibility, and societal relevance, driving advancements across multiple sectors.
Wat dragen creatieve onderzoeksmethodes bij aan vernieuwing binnen de zorg? We onderzoeken dit binnen tien projecten van het Create Health-programma van ZonMw. In deze projecten wordt kennis ontwikkeld over de toegevoegde waarde van creatieve manieren van werken bij e-health innovatie. Informatie over de onderzoeksresultaten is te vinden op de website: husite.nl/creatieve-onderzoeksmethodes en het artikel: CHIWaWA maakt samenwerking in create-health onderzoek inzichtelijk | Hogeschool Utrecht (hu.nl)Doel Het Create Health programma heeft tot doel om bij te dragen aan maatschappelijke uitdagingen rondom gezond en actief ouder worden. CHIWaWA werkt daarbij toe naar een conceptueel model dat manieren van werken in kaart brengt in create health projecten – gekoppeld aan theorie over boundary crossing en research impact – met betrekking tot projectuitkomsten en kennis-, persoonlijke-, en systeemontwikkeling van betrokken actoren. Resultaten onderzoek Kennis die zowel online als offline te raadplegen is, in een boek, in wetenschappelijke artikelen en op een website. Deze kennis bevat: Inzicht in kansen om impact van e-health innovatie in ‘create health’-samenwerking te vergroten; Projectnarratieven met ‘best practices’ voor interdisciplinaire samenwerking waarbij onderzoekers, creatieve industrie en zorgprofessionals betrokken zijn; Guidelines voor ontwikkelaars van e-health applicaties m.b.t. samenwerking met de creatieve industrie; Guidelines voor beleidsmakers m.b.t. het stimuleren van samenwerking tussen zorg en creatieve industrie en het gebruik van creatieve manieren van werken om onderzoek naar de praktijk te krijgen; Aanpak Vanuit een service-dominant logic perspectief wordt bekeken hoe toegepaste kennis en skills worden gedeeld tussen actoren die betrokken zijn bij de verschillende ‘create health’-projecten, wat de meerwaarde daarvan is en wat actoren van die uitwisseling – als proces – leren. De focus ligt op co-creatie van waarde, die door samenwerking en uitwisseling tot stand komt. Door middel van procesonderzoek wordt er toegewerkt naar bijdragen aan theorieontwikkeling op het gebied van boundary crossing en contribution mapping. Resultaten Eindpublicatie: Create Health: Samenwerking tussen zorg, wetenschap en creatieve industrie (2023) Boek: Create Ways of Working. Insights from ten ehealth Innovation research projects (2022) Website www.creatieveonderzoeksmethodes.nl (2022) Bijdragen aan conferenties en symposia Co-design in de anderhalvemetermaatschappij (whitepaper), Dutch Design Week 2020. Download de presentatieslides. Collaborating in complexity. Strategies for interdisciplinary collaboration n design work, Design4Health conference 2020 Grounding Practices. How researchers ground their work in create-health collaborations for designing e-health solutions, Design4Health conference 2020 Seven ways to foster interdisciplinary collaboration in research involving healthcare and creative research disciplines, DementiaLab conference 2019 Posterpresentatie: Health x Design, DementiaLab conference 2019 Meer informatie over het Create Health programma Het ZonMw programma Create Health heeft als doel om bij te dragen aan de maatschappelijke uitdaging rondom gezond en actief ouder worden. Binnen het programma worden activiteiten uitgezet waarbij de samenwerking tussen de creatieve industrie en zorg en welzijn voorop staat. Het gaat hierbij om publiek-private samenwerking (PPS).
