Impact of Substance Use Disorder Curriculum and X-Waiver Training on Emergency Medicine Residents.

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in healthcare research is widely regarded as essential, though perspectives vary on what involvement should entail and why it should happen. Greenhalgh et al., [] outlined three key arguments for PPI. First, patients and families have a right to contribute to and shape research that affects their lives. Second, involving patients and the public can enhance the quality, efficiency and real‐world relevance of research. Third, meaningful alliances with patients and the public strengthen the accountability and transparency of research processes and can improve the ability of projects to attract resources. PPI authenticates patients as epistemic experts and privileges experiences as stories to be shared [, ]. Involvement of people who experience social disadvantage and inequalities, referred to in this paper as ‘priority populations’, is fundamental for improving health, wellbeing and addressing perverse health disparities. We use the term ‘priority populations’, drawn from Australian and international health equity policy, to refer to groups who experience systematic and avoidable health inequities and whose perspectives are frequently under‐represented in service design, including, for example, people with mental health conditions, First Nations peoples, culturally and linguistically diverse communities and people with low socioeconomic status [, ]. Co‐design of health services is an increasingly used method to meaningfully enable PPI in an inclusive participatory space []. Co‐design is a collaborative design methodology that engages diverse stakeholders throughout the design process, drawing on their expertise and lived experiences to generate solutions that are contextually relevant and person‐centred []. Co‐design is especially valuable when working with priority populations, whose perspectives are often overlooked in traditional top‐down approaches []. Differences in power and influence among stakeholders, however, can lead to asymmetry and the marginalisation of certain voices []. This challenge is particularly pronounced in mental health, where histories of trauma, stigma and uneven power distribution are common []. Although co‐design has emerged as a leading framework for mental health service reform, creating a safe space for patients, carers and providers to understand problems and develop solutions can be difficult [, ]. Experience‐Based Co‐Design (EBCD) is one approach that has been applied across diverse healthcare settings, including a community forensic facility [], acute hospitals [], cancer services [, ], emergency departments [, ] and intensive care []. The aim of EBCD is to understand the subjective emotions, knowledge and experiences of service users, carers and providers to inform service improvements [, ]. In healthcare settings, EBCD commences with observations of the clinical environment and interviews with service users (patients) and providers to identify moments of shared concern, called touchpoints []. Patient interviews, traditionally filmed and edited to illustrate key moments in patient experiences [], are used at the beginning of co‐design sessions to engender empathy in providers that ‘triggers’ momentum for change. By centring the voices of people with lived experience, these films are designed to have a powerful humanising effect among service providers []. As a participatory tool, trigger films support reflection, emotional connection and shared priority setting [, ].