Research-creation in the health sciences: A scoping review protocol
7 affiliations
- 1Rehabilitation Sciences Program, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
- 2Axiology Clinic, Edmonton, Canada.
- 3Faculty of Kinesiology, Sport and Recreation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
- 4Geoffrey and Robyn Sperber Health Sciences Library, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
- 5JBI University of Alberta Centre for Knowledge Mobilization, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
- 6Faculty of Business and Social Sciences, University of Applied Science, Osnabrück, Germany.
- 7Department of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Abstract
Background: Research-creation is a methodological orientation that integrates creative and artistic processes with scholarly inquiry, positioning creative practice as a primary mode of knowledge generation. Originating largely within the arts and humanities in Canada, research-creation has increasingly appeared in health sciences contexts, including rehabilitation, mental health, health professions education, and community health research. However, no review has systematically mapped how research-creation is defined, conceptualized, or applied within health sciences scholarship, and significant ambiguity persists regarding the forms of data it generates, how those data are analyzed, and how creative outputs function within empirical research processes. Objectives: This scoping review aims to map how research-creation is defined and conceptualized in health sciences literature; identify the purposes for which it is used and the health-related contexts in which it appears; describe the theories, methodological approaches, and creative methods employed; and examine what forms of health-related data are generated, how they are analyzed, and how knowledge is mobilized. Eligibility criteria: Sources were included if they explicitly used the term “research-creation” (or its hyphenated and slash variants) to describe their method, approach, or project; focused on health, illness, care, healthcare systems, rehabilitation, mental health, public or community health, or health-related training; and generated empirical or experiential material analyzed or discussed in relation to health. No language limits were applied. Sources of evidence: A systematic search of 22 article databases was conducted from inception to Aug 2026. Grey literature searches included EBSCO Open Dissertations, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Reference lists of included studies will be hand-searched. Charting methods: Data will be extracted independently by two reviewers using four structured charting tables capturing study characteristics, population, concept, and context. An expanded extraction framework was developed to accommodate the distinctive methodological features of research-creation, including creative processes, citational lineages, creative outputs, and forms of health-related data generated. Data will be analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis. Extraction tools will be piloted on a subset of five included studies. Results: The search identified 842 sources, with 577 remaining after duplicate removal. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction are currently underway. Conclusions: This scoping review will provide the first systematic mapping of research-creation within health sciences research and training. Findings may strengthen interdisciplinary dialogue between arts, social sciences, and health disciplines; support methodological transparency for researchers employing creative inquiry; and serve as a resource for researchers, trainees, practitioners, and supervisors seeking to understand how research-creation contributes to health-related knowledge production.
Related
- Mapping methodological approaches in perinatal health and wellbeing research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women: a scoping review protocol
- Diagnostic criteria for adrenal overt Cushing syndrome: prepared jointly by the Japan Endocrine Society and the Health and Labour Sciences Research Grant (Research on Intractable Diseases) Research Group on Disorders of Adrenal Hormones
- Co-creation in research, policy engagement and advocacy: Lessons and limits from two decades of practice at the African Population and Health Research Center
- Mapping global oral health financing architectures: a scoping review protocol.
- Immigrant-origin adolescent mental and sexual health disparities in the USA: a scoping review protocol.
BibTeX
@article{ha2026researchcreation,
title = {{Research-creation in the health sciences: A scoping review protocol}},
author = {C J Ha and Nathan Viktor Fawaz and Liz Dennett and Susan Armijo-Olivo and Tim Barlott and Danielle Peers},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0359410},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359410},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Research-creation in the health sciences: A scoping review protocol
AU - C J Ha
AU - Nathan Viktor Fawaz
AU - Liz Dennett
AU - Susan Armijo-Olivo
AU - Tim Barlott
AU - Danielle Peers
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/21
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0359410
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359410
AB - Background: Research-creation is a methodological orientation that integrates creative and artistic processes with scholarly inquiry, positioning creative practice as a primary mode of knowledge generation. Originating largely within the arts and humanities in Canada, research-creation has increasingly appeared in health sciences contexts, including rehabilitation, mental health, health professions education, and community health research. However, no review has systematically mapped how research-creation is defined, conceptualized, or applied within health sciences scholarship, and significant ambiguity persists regarding the forms of data it generates, how those data are analyzed, and how creative outputs function within empirical research processes. Objectives: This scoping review aims to map how research-creation is defined and conceptualized in health sciences literature; identify the purposes for which it is used and the health-related contexts in which it appears; describe the theories, methodological approaches, and creative methods employed; and examine what forms of health-related data are generated, how they are analyzed, and how knowledge is mobilized. Eligibility criteria: Sources were included if they explicitly used the term “research-creation” (or its hyphenated and slash variants) to describe their method, approach, or project; focused on health, illness, care, healthcare systems, rehabilitation, mental health, public or community health, or health-related training; and generated empirical or experiential material analyzed or discussed in relation to health. No language limits were applied. Sources of evidence: A systematic search of 22 article databases was conducted from inception to Aug 2026. Grey literature searches included EBSCO Open Dissertations, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Reference lists of included studies will be hand-searched. Charting methods: Data will be extracted independently by two reviewers using four structured charting tables capturing study characteristics, population, concept, and context. An expanded extraction framework was developed to accommodate the distinctive methodological features of research-creation, including creative processes, citational lineages, creative outputs, and forms of health-related data generated. Data will be analyzed using inductive qualitative content analysis. Extraction tools will be piloted on a subset of five included studies. Results: The search identified 842 sources, with 577 remaining after duplicate removal. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, and data extraction are currently underway. Conclusions: This scoping review will provide the first systematic mapping of research-creation within health sciences research and training. Findings may strengthen interdisciplinary dialogue between arts, social sciences, and health disciplines; support methodological transparency for researchers employing creative inquiry; and serve as a resource for researchers, trainees, practitioners, and supervisors seeking to understand how research-creation contributes to health-related knowledge production.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -