'You've come to children that are in care and given us the opportunity to get our voices heard': The journey of looked after children and researchers in developing a Patient and Public Involvement group

Co-production of health and social science research with vulnerable children and young people: A rapid review

BACKGROUND

The term 'care-experienced' refers to anyone who is currently in care or has been in care at any stage in their life. A complex interplay of factors leads to care-experienced children and young people (CECYP) experiencing poorer oral health and access to dental care than their peers. A rapid review of the co-production of health and social care research with vulnerable children and young people (CYP) was carried out to inform the development of a co-produced research project exploring the oral health behaviours and access to dental services of CECYP. Here, 'co-production' refers to the involvement of CYP in the planning or conduct of research with explicit roles in which they generate ideas, evidence and research outputs.

AIM

To learn how to meaningfully involve vulnerable CYP in the co-production of health and social science research.

OBJECTIVES

To identify: Different approaches to facilitating the engagement of vulnerable CYP in co-production of health and social science research; different activities carried out in such approaches, challenges to engaging vulnerable CYP in co-production of health and social science research and ways to overcome them and areas of best practice in relation to research co-production with vulnerable CYP.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A rapid review of peer-reviewed articles was conducted in six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, SocINDEX, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science) and grey literature to identify studies that engaged vulnerable CYP in co-approaches to health and social research.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 1394 documents identified in the search, 40 were included and analysed. A number of different approaches to co-production were used in the studies. The CYP was involved in a range of activities, chiefly the development of data collection tools, data collection and dissemination. Individual challenges for CYP and researchers, practical and institutional factors and ethical considerations impacted the success of co-production.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Co-production of health and social science with vulnerable CYP presents challenges to researchers and CYP calling for all to demonstrate reflexivity and awareness of biases, strengths and limitations. Used appropriately and well, co-production offers benefits to researchers and CYP and can contribute to research that reflects the needs of vulnerable CYP. Adherence to the key principles of inclusion, safeguarding, respect and well-being facilitates this approach.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Members of our patient and public involvement and stakeholder groups contributed to the interpretation of the review findings. This manuscript was written together with a young care leaver, Skye Boswell, who is one of the authors. She contributed to the preparation of the manuscript, reviewing the findings and their interpretation.

Research Priorities of the Pediatric Spinal Cord Injury Population: An International Insight for Rehabilitation Care

BACKGROUND

Although feedback from people with adult-onset spinal cord injury (SCI) has been considered for new rehabilitation programs, little is known about the priorities of the pediatric-onset SCI population. This study describes and compares health and life (H&L) domain research priorities of youth with pediatric-onset SCI and their parents/caregivers.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey, designed by the Pan-European Paediatric Spinal Cord Injury (PEPSCI) Collaboration, was performed at six European countries. Dyad data from 202 participants, youth with pediatric-onset SCI (n = 101) and their parents/caregivers (n = 101), were analyzed with the PEPSCI H&L domain surveys.

RESULTS

The cohort was composed of 8 to 12-year-olds (30.7%), 13 to 17-year-olds (38.6%), and 18 to 25-year-olds (30.7%). The top three H&L domain research priorities reported by parents/caregivers of 8 to 12-year-olds were "walking/ability to move" (91%), "bladder" function (90%), and "general health/feel" (89%), compared with "physical function" (93%), "general health/feel" (90%), and "walking/ability to move" (89%) rated by parents/caregivers of 13 to 25-year-olds. "Bowel" function (85%), "leg/foot movement" (84%), and "bladder" function (84%) were reported as priorities by 13 to 25-year-olds, whereas "physical function" (84%), "experience at school" (83%), and "general mood" were highlighted by 8 to 12-year-olds. The top 10 priorities preferred by 13 to 25-year-olds when compared with the top 10 priorities reported by their parents/caregivers, included problems related to "bowel" and "pain."

CONCLUSIONS

Health domain research priorities were highlighted by 13 to 25-year-olds, compared with their parents/caregivers who equally identified H&L domains. This survey will aid health care and clinical research organizations to engage stakeholders to implement a comprehensive research strategy for the pediatric SCI population.

Reporting involvement activities with children and young people in paediatric research: a framework analysis

BACKGROUND

The active involvement of patients and the public in the design and delivery of health research has been increasingly encouraged, if not enforced. Knowledge of how this is realised in practice, especially where children and young people (CYP) are concerned, is limited, partly due to the low level of reporting of patient and public involvement (PPI) in general. The aim of this work was to assess how researchers funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) report the involvement of CYP in the design and conduct of child health research to better understand the opportunities offered to CYP, and the realities of involvement in practice.

METHODS

A participation matrix, analysis framework and accompanying tools were adapted from existing frameworks, including a child-rights informed framework, the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public Checklist Short Form (GRIPP2SF), and NIHR reporting expectations. Child-focused research reports were identified from the NIHR Journals Library, including any interventional or observational study involving CYP aged 0-< 24 years. In two co-design workshops with healthcare professionals and CYP, we tested and refined the participation matrix, analysis framework and accompanying tools.

RESULTS

Only thirty-two NIHR reports out of 169 (19%) were identified as relevant and included reporting of PPI with CYP. We identified significant variability in the way PPI with CYP was reported. Only 4/32 (12%) reports fully met NIHR (and GRIPP2SF) reporting criteria. Only 3/32 (9%) reports formally evaluated or self-reflected on PPI activities with CYP, whilst 15/32 (47%) provided minimal information about CYP involvement. The most common approach to involving CYP (23/32, 72%) was through the medium of existing groups or networks.

CONCLUSION

Despite the NIHR's commitment to increase the quality, transparency, and consistency of reporting PPI, the reporting of involvement with CYP remains sub-optimal. Neglecting to report key details of involvement methods and impacts deprives the research community of knowledge to advance the field of delivering 'meaningful' PPI with CYP. Practical guidance on how researchers can report the processes and outputs of CYP involvement more rigorously may help child health researchers to involve them more meaningfully. This research offers practical tools informed by CYP to aid the reporting process.

Meaningful patient and public involvement in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation: A systematic review

Introduction

The importance of meaningfully involving patients and the public in digital health innovation is widely acknowledged, but often poorly understood. This review, therefore, sought to explore how patients and the public are involved in digital health innovation and to identify factors that support and inhibit meaningful patient and public involvement (PPI) in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation.

Methods

Searches were undertaken from 2010 to July 2020 in the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus and ACM Digital Library. Grey literature searches were also undertaken using the Patient Experience Library database and Google Scholar.

Results

Of the 10,540 articles identified, 433 were included. The majority of included articles were published in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Australia, with representation from 42 countries highlighting the international relevance of PPI in digital health. 112 topic areas where PPI had reportedly taken place were identified. Areas most often described included cancer (n = 50), mental health (n = 43), diabetes (n = 26) and long‐term conditions (n = 19). Interestingly, over 133 terms were used to describe PPI; few were explicitly defined. Patients were often most involved in the final, passive stages of an innovation journey, for example, usability testing, where the ability to proactively influence change was severely limited. Common barriers to achieving meaningful PPI included data privacy and security concerns, not involving patients early enough and lack of trust. Suggested enablers were often designed to counteract such challenges.

Conclusions

PPI is largely viewed as valuable and essential in digital health innovation, but rarely practised. Several barriers exist for both innovators and patients, which currently limits the quality, frequency and duration of PPI in digital health innovation, although improvements have been made in the past decade. Some reported barriers and enablers such as the importance of data privacy and security appear to be unique to PPI in digital innovation. Greater efforts should be made to support innovators and patients to become meaningfully involved in digital health innovations from the outset, given its reported benefits and impacts. Stakeholder consensus on the principles that underpin meaningful PPI in digital health innovation would be helpful in providing evidence‐based guidance on how to achieve this.

Patient or Public Contribution

This review has received extensive patient and public contributions with a representative from the Patient Experience Library involved throughout the review's conception, from design (including suggested revisions to the search strategy) through to article production and dissemination. Other areas of patient and public contributor involvement include contributing to the inductive thematic analysis process, refining the thematic framework and finalizing theme wording, helping to ensure relevance, value and meaning from a patient perspective. Findings from this review have also been presented to a variety of stakeholders including patients, patient advocates and clinicians through a series of focus groups and webinars. Given their extensive involvement, the representative from the Patient Experience Library is rightly included as an author of this review.

The challenges of assessing the impact of a comedy programme aimed at improving the mental well-being of young people

Assessing the impact of community-based programmes presents many challenges. One difficulty encountered is how to develop appropriate research methods to capture the impact of the work while also meeting the demands of external funders. For almost two decades, the charity organisation The Comedy Trust (TCT) have attempted to navigate these challenges. In 2018, TCT had the opportunity to work with a university-based researcher to develop their approaches to research. We aimed to explore what happens when you move away from quantifiable predetermined methods to take a more participatory approach to work alongside the participants of the programme. We decided to focus on their Feeling Funny Youth programme, which is aimed at young people to support their mental health and well-being. This paper is a case study of how the programme worked with a group of young people based within a youth organisation. In this paper, we offer a comparison of the standardised tool adopted by TCT with the development of more creative and participatory methods developed in collaboration with young people who participated in the programme. We offer an insight into what can be gained by adopting more creative and participatory methods to capture the experiences of young people, as this enabled us to really hear the important messages they want to share.

Health and LifeDomain ResearchPriorities in Children, Adolescents and Young Adults With Pediatric-Onset Spinal Cord Injury: A National Cross-Sectional Survey in England

Background

Although feedback from people with adult-onset spinal cord injury (SCI) has been considered in developing research programs, little is known about pediatric-onset SCI priorities.

Objectives

To describe the health and life (H&L) domain research priorities of youth with pediatric-onset SCI living in England.

Methods

Youth with pediatric-onset SCI (≥6 months) were recruited from five English rehabilitation centers and invited with their parents/caregivers to complete the age-appropriate surveys designed by the Pan-European Paediatric Spinal Cord Injury (PEPSCI) collaboration.

Results

A total of 73 surveys were received (32 from participants with SCI and 41 from their parents/caregivers), providing information on 47 individuals with SCI: 2- to 7-year-olds (29.8%), 8- to 12-year-olds (19.2%), 13- to 17-year-olds (17.0%), and 18 to 25-year-olds (34.0%). The top three research priorities reported by parents/caregivers of 2- to 12-year-old and 13- to 25-year-olds were pain (81%/89%), physical function (91%/83%) and health care access (78%/78%). Eighty-nine percent of 8- to 12-year-olds emphasized schooling, peer relationships, and general mood as their research priorities. The top three research priorities for Health or Life domains reported by 13- to 25-year-olds included spasms (95%), pain (91%), pressure injuries (91%), health care access (83%), physical function (78%), and daily personal needs (74%).

Conclusion

Although there should be an emphasis on addressing important life domain issues for 8- to 12-year-olds with SCI, adolescents and young adults mostly prioritized health domain research priorities in addition to health care access. This survey will aid health care and clinical research organizations to engage stakeholders to implement a comprehensive SCI research strategy in England for the pediatric population.

The attitudes of healthy children and researchers towards the challenges of involving children in research: an exploratory study

BACKGROUND

A growing trend in research is to involve co-researchers. It is referred to as Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) and comprises three groups: the patients, the public, and the researchers. Like in adult public involvement, healthy children can also be considered as 'the public'. Paediatric patients and researchers experienced in conducting child-inclusive research are often asked about their attitudes towards the challenges they encounter. This is not the case for healthy children and researchers without such experience. Our aim was to investigate the attitudes of these children and researchers towards the challenges encountered during child-inclusive research.

METHODS

This was an exploratory study. We interviewed healthy children and adult researchers without prior experience in child-inclusive research. We recruited the children through a foundation for young researchers and the adult researchers from two hospitals, both in Groningen, the Netherlands. We audio recorded the interviews, and they were transcribed verbatim. We analysed the data using qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

We interviewed five adult researchers and seven healthy children, aged 9 to 14 years. Both groups thought that it was best to involve children in paediatric research from as early a stage as possible. The children assumed that no prior training would be needed because they had already been trained at school. The researchers' attitudes varied regarding training children beforehand. Both groups thought that researchers did not need prior training on how to involve children if they worked with children on a daily basis. The children felt that recognition and a modest financial reward was appropriate. Adult researchers were cautious about rewarding the children. They feared it might render the children less intrinsically motivated.

CONCLUSION

Our study indicated that young and adult researchers have clear attitudes towards the challenges encountered during child-inclusive research. Young researchers could help adult researchers to find solutions to these challenges, even if they have no prior experience in child-inclusive research. Adult researchers who acknowledge the importance of child-inclusive research represent a significant step towards meaningful involvement of children. Our results imply that children could be involved in the decision-making process concerning the challenges encountered in child-inclusive research.

Behaviour change interventions to reduce risky substance use and improve mental health in children in care: the SOLID three-arm feasibility RCT

Background

Looked-after children and care leavers (henceforth children in care) are young people placed under the care of local authorities, often because of a history of family abuse and/or neglect. These young people have significantly increased risk of substance use and mental health problems compared with peers.

Aim

The Supporting Looked After Children and Care Leavers In Decreasing Drugs, and alcohol (SOLID) trial aimed to investigate the feasibility of a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing two behaviour change interventions to reduce risky substance use (illicit drugs and alcohol) in and improve the mental health of children in care aged 12–20 years.

Methods

The study consisted of two phases: (1) a formative phase that adapted the motivational enhancement therapy and social behaviour and network therapy interventions for use with children in care and (2) a three-arm pilot randomised controlled trial (comparing motivational enhancement therapy, social behaviour and network therapy and usual care), and a linked process and economic (return on investment) evaluation. Trial feasibility was compared with prespecified STOP/GO criteria.

Setting

Six local authority areas in the north-east of England.

Participants

Children in care (aged 12–20 years) who screened positive for drug and/or alcohol use within the last 12 months were eligible for the trial. The formative and process evaluations included children in care, carers, social workers, and drug and alcohol workers.

Outcome measures

The primary outcomes were recruitment and retention rates at 12 months’ follow-up. Baseline and 12-month follow-up questionnaires measured self-reported drug and alcohol use, mental health and health-related quality of life. The process evaluation considered acceptability and engagement with the interventions and trial procedures.

Results

Formative findings (n = 65) highlighted the need for interventions to increase the emphasis on therapeutic relationships, use creative methods of engagement and support the identification of treatment goals wider than substance misuse. Within the randomised controlled trial, of 860 participants screened, 211 (24.5%) met the inclusion criteria. One hundred and twelve (53%) of the 211 eligible children were recruited and randomised. Just 15 of the 76 (20%) participants allocated to intervention attended any of the motivational enhancement therapy of social behaviour and network therapy sessions, and 60 (54%) participants completed the 12-month follow-up. The screening and recruitment of children in care required significantly more time and resource investment by researchers and children’s services than planned. The process evaluation (n = 116) demonstrated that, despite participants engaging in risky substance use, they did not often acknowledge this nor felt that they needed help. Children in care had complex, chaotic lives and children’s services departments were less research mature and extremely stretched; this, coupled with the multiple steps in the intervention pathway and study protocol, resulted in low adherence to the intervention and the trial.

Conclusions

The SOLID trial demonstrated successful engagement with children in care to adapt the motivational enhancement therapy and social behaviour and network therapy interventions. However, the pilot randomised controlled trial found that a definitive trial is not feasible. The current screen, refer and treat pathway for children in care did not work. There is an urgent need to radically rethink how we deliver therapeutic services for children in care. A pragmatic evaluation design, coupled with additional research resource for children’s services, is needed to evaluate these novel models of care at scale.

Trial registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018098974 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN80786829.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 8, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

'You've come to children that are in care and given us the opportunity to get our voices heard': The journey of looked after children and researchers in developing a Patient and Public Involvement group

BACKGROUND

Looked after children and care leavers (denoted as LAC) are often described as a 'hard to reach' group of young people, and their voices are rarely sought to inform academic research.

METHODS

This paper reports on experiences and reflections of a group of children and young people and academic researchers who developed a Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group that was set up in the context of an ongoing health service intervention trial with LAC.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Eighteen qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven LAC, the participation officer within a North East Children in Care Council and the four researchers involved in developing and facilitating the PPI group. PPI sessions (n = 9) each approximately 1 hour in length were conducted over an 18-month period.

ANALYSIS

The qualitative interviews were transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data, and direct quotes are used within the paper.

MAIN OUTCOMES

The LAC used the PPI group to produce a 5-minute video to highlight why they think young people should be involved in research. Overall findings suggested that it was feasible to develop a research-related PPI group with LAC. Findings from the research were used to co-develop 'top tips' of working with vulnerable young people such as looked after children.

CONCLUSION

This paper has shown that PPI with LAC can be done if a co-production approach to research is taken. It also suggests that assumptions regarding the capabilities of young people as researchers need to be re-evaluated.