Involving young people in BRIGHTLIGHT from study inception to secondary data analysis: insights from 10 years of user involvement

Conducting Patient-Oriented Research in Pediatric Populations: A Narrative Review

It has become increasingly common for researchers to partner with patients as members of the research team and collaborate to use their lived experiences to shape research priorities, interventions, dissemination, and more. The patient-oriented research (POR) model has been adopted by both adult and pediatric health researchers. This cultural change to conducting pediatric health research brings with it new methodologies, tools, challenges, and benefits. In this review, we aim to provide guidance on how to conduct POR for pediatric populations using examples from the literature. We describe considerations for engagement before the project begins, for engagement across the research cycle, and for measurement and evaluation. We aim to show that conducting POR is feasible, beneficial, and that many common challenges and barriers can be overcome with preparation and usage of specific tools.

Positive Impacts of Adolescent Involvement in Health Research: An Umbrella Review

Despite an increased recognition of the right of adolescents to be involved in decisions that affect them, young people continue to be under-involved in health research. One of the reasons is a lack of awareness among researchers on the current evidence base around the benefits of involving adolescents. To address this, we conducted an umbrella review to synthesize the evidence on the positive impacts of adolescent involvement in health research. This umbrella review was preregistered with PROSPERO (CRD42021287467). We searched 11 databases, Google Scholar, PROSPERO, reference lists, 10 journals, websites of 472 organizations, and sought input from experts. Ultimately, we included 99 review articles. We found that adolescent involvement has many positive impacts on young people, including increased knowledge and skills; personal development; financial benefits; career and academic growth; enhanced relationships; and valuing their experience. The positive impacts of adolescent involvement on the research itself include increased relevance of the study to adolescents, improved recruitment, development of more adolescent-friendly materials, enhanced data collection and analysis, and more effective dissemination. Researchers also benefited from adolescents' involvement through increased knowledge, skills, and a shift in their attitudes. The evidence supporting the positive impacts of adolescent involvement in research is substantial but limited by a lack of rigorous evaluation, inconsistent reporting, and unclear evaluation methods.

Asking those who know their needs best: A framework for active engagement and involvement of childhood cancer survivors and parents in the process of psychosocial research-A workshop report

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in healthcare research is crucial for effectively addressing patients' needs and setting appropriate research priorities. However, there is a lack of awareness and adequate methods for practicing PPIE, especially for vulnerable groups like childhood cancer survivors.

AIMS

This project aimed to develop and evaluate engagement methods to actively involve pediatric oncological patients, survivors, and their caregivers in developing relevant research questions and practical study designs.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An interdisciplinary working group recruited n = 16 childhood cancer survivors and their caregivers to work through the entire process of developing a research question and a practicable study design. A systematic literature review was conducted to gather adequate PPIE methods which were then applied and evaluated in a series of three workshop modules, each lasting 1.5 days. The applied methods were continuously evaluated, while a monitoring group oversaw the project and continuously developed and adapted additional methods. The participants rated the different methods with varying scores. Over the workshop series, the participants successfully developed a research question, devised an intervention, and designed a study to evaluate their project. They also reported increased expertise in PPIE and research knowledge compared to the baseline. The project resulted in a practical toolbox for future research, encompassing the final workshop structure, evaluated methods and materials, guiding principles, and general recommendations.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate that with a diverse set of effective methods and flexible support, actively involving patients, survivors, and caregivers can uncover patients' unmet disease-related needs and generate practical solutions apt for scientific evaluation. The resulting toolbox, filled with evaluated and adaptable methods (workbook, Supplement 1 and 2), equips future scientists with the necessary resources to successfully perform PPIE in the development of health care research projects that effectively integrate patients' perspectives and address actual cancer-related needs. This integration of PPIE practices has the potential to enhance the quality and relevance of health research and care, as well as to increase patient empowerment leading to sustainable improvements in patients' quality of life.

The INSCHOOL project: showcasing participatory qualitative methods derived from patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) work with young people with long-term health conditions

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests resources and services benefit from being developed in collaboration with the young people they aim to support. Despite this, patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) with young people is often tokenistic, limited in engagement and not developmentally tailored to young people. Our paper aims to build knowledge and practice for meaningfully engaging with young people in research design, analysis and as research participants.

METHODS

We report the participatory processes from the INSCHOOL project, examining long-term health conditions and schooling among 11-18 year olds. Young people were consulted at the inception of the project through a hospital-based youth forum. This began a partnership where young people co-designed study documents, informed the recruitment process, developed creative approaches to data collection, participated in pilot interviews, co-analysed the qualitative data and co-presented results.

RESULTS

PPIE advisors, participants and researchers all benefitted from consistent involvement of young people throughout the project. Long-term engagement allowed advisors and researchers to build rapport and facilitated openness in sharing perspectives. PPIE advisors valued being able to shape the initial aims and language of the research questions, and contribute to every subsequent stage of the project. Advisors co-designed flexible data collection methods for the qualitative project that provided participants with choices in how they took part (interviews, focus groups, written tasks). Further choice was offered through co-designed preparation activities where participants completed one of four creative activities prior to the interview. Participants were therefore able to have control over how they participated and how they described their school experiences. Through participatory analysis meetings advisors used their first-hand experiences to inform the creation of themes and the language used to describe these themes. PPIE in every stage of the process helped researchers to keep the results grounded in young people's experience and challenge their assumptions as adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Young people have much to offer and the INSCHOOL project has shown that researchers can meaningfully involve young people in all aspects of research. Consistent PPIE resulted in a project where the voices of young people were prioritised throughout and power imbalances were reduced, leading to meaningful participant-centred data.

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.

Research involvement and engagement of adolescent and young adults in a cancer trajectory: a 5-year experience from a patient support facility at a university hospital

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this case study is to describe how a vulnerable group of patients can be included in research. The activities, challenges, lessons learned, and reflections on the importance of patient involvement in research for 5 years (2016-2021) at the adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer support facility, Kræftværket, are reported.

MAIN BODY

A patient panel at Kræftværket, the Youth Panel has multiple aims, one of which is the ability to perform patient involvement in research, with the goal of achieving research of high quality. We here describe how Patient and Public involvement (PPI) can be customized to AYAs in a cancer trajectory, who face many challenges, including those in the physical, psychological, and social domains. During 2016-2021, Youth Panel meetings were planned every third month but interrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. With a flexible structure and a dynamic panel including 10-15 varying AYAs in a cancer trajectory, engagement and involvement have been maintained. Eight research topics were investigated, seven of which were discussed and confirmed to be important by the Youth Panel. Out of eight topics, three were raised by patients, and five by researchers. One was not discussed due to COVID-19. Some of the challenges we have experienced were related to the flexible meeting structure and the differing expectations and priorities as well as the impact of COVID-19. However, we experienced that patient involvement is possible in the field of AYA oncology if a trusting environment is created. A key finding in our case study was, that without a national Danish PPI program and no defined international standard for PPI in AYA cancer research yet, we were able to give patients the possibility to give input to researchers on topics where research is missing.

CONCLUSION

Here, we demonstrate how patient involvement in research has been performed at an AYA cancer facility, Kræftværket, during a 5-year period. We encourage others to perform patient-involving research, even in challenging populations. Ideally this must follow international standards for PPI in AYA cancer research when such exist to improve research with crucial insight from patients.

"We know that our voices are valued, and that people are actually going to listen": co-producing an evaluation of a young people's research advisory group

BACKGROUND

Children and young people's (CYP) involvement is an increasing priority in UK healthcare and in heath research, alongside recognition that involving CYP in research requires different considerations to involving adults. Underpinned by children's rights and a co-production ethos this paper, co-authored with young evaluators, explores the learning from a co-produced evaluation of eyeYPAG, a young persons' research advisory group (YPAG) for eye and vision research based at Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UK.

METHODS

A team of young evaluators, supported by the eyeYPAG facilitator, conducted focus groups and online surveys with YPAG members, their parents and carers, researchers, group facilitators and funders. Qualitative data was analysed using a collaborative reflexive thematic analysis approach. Quantitative data, limited by the small number of participants, was analysed in Excel and reported as descriptive data.

RESULTS

CYP valued the social and creative aspects of the group as well as learning about research and developing skills and confidence. Learning was a two-way process, with both researchers and facilitators reflecting on how much they had learnt from working with the YPAG. All participants talked about the importance of impact, feeling that CYP are making a difference to research, as well as CYP's right to be involved. Effective planning and facilitation were key to the success of the group, in relation to accessibility and the development and delivery of sessions both online and in-person. Resourcing and administration were key challenges to this, as was engaging researchers who were not already converted to the public involvement cause. As the nature of a YPAG is that it primarily focuses on advising researcher-led projects, co-production was identified as something that the group was 'working towards', including through this evaluation. Co-producing with CYP involves building up knowledge, confidence and acknowledging power dynamics.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-producing an evaluation enabled us to learn about the benefits and challenges of involving CYP in research, as well as how to involve them in the development of that evidence. An ethos of co-production and children's rights helped to shift the balance of power and develop more engaging and inclusive ways of working.

The Impact of Patient and Family Engagement in Child Health Research: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

To identify impacts of patient and family engagement in child health research on the research process, research teams, and patient and family partners.

STUDY DESIGN

A scoping review was conducted using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases. English-language studies were included if they described ≥1 impact of patient and family engagement on child health research (age <18 years), researchers, or patient and family partners. Data were retrieved by 2 independent extractors.

RESULTS

Of the 7688 studies identified, 25 were included in our analysis. Impacts of patient and family engagement were mostly on the research process (n = 24 studies; 96%), 11 (44%) determined impacts on the research team, and 17 (68%) reported impacts on patient and family partners. Less than one-half (n = 11; 44%) had a primary purpose of determining the impact of patient engagement, and no study used a specific evaluation tool.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and family engagement can strengthen the relevance and feasibility of research and empower researchers and patient partners. Measuring and reporting the impact of engagement is rare. Systematic and standardized evaluation of engagement is needed to understand how, when, and why to engage patients and families.

Setting international standards for patient and parent involvement and engagement in childhood, adolescent and young adult cancer research: A report from a European Collaborative Workshop

BACKGROUND

Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) in research, advocates for research conducted 'with' not 'for' the affected population. In paediatric oncology research, the parents of children, adolescents and young adults affected by cancer are represented by the term 'public' in the acronym PPIE. Patients (those with cancer and cancer survivors) are also passionate advocates who drive forward the research priorities of children, adolescents and young adults throughout the entire research process.

AIMS

A workshop was held at an international professional meeting in 2019 with the aim to define Patient and Parent Involvement and Engagement (PPIE); capture PPIE activities on a European level; and to explore the role of PPIE in non-interventional research. A proposed framework for a European PPIE strategy for childhood, adolescent and young adult cancers was also discussed.

METHODS

The 60-minute workshop was attended by health care professionals, researchers, scientists, parents, survivors and charity/support organisations. A presentation to define PPIE, including the difference in terminology for PPIE in the context of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancers was discussed. Best practice examples from the United Kingdom (UK) helped to demonstrate the positive impact of PPIE in paediatric oncology research. Three breakout groups then explored themes relating to PPIE, namely PPIE priorities, PPIE mapping for Europe, and PPIE in non-interventional research and data-linkage.

RESULTS

Disparity in PPIE activities across Europe was evident, with ambiguity surrounding terminology and expected roles for PPIE representatives in paediatric oncology research. A lack of PPIE activity in Eastern Europe correlated with a lack of availability for clinical trials and poorer survival rates for paediatric oncology patients. There was unanimous support for PPIE embedded research in all areas, including in non-interventional studies.

CONCLUSION

A European-level definition of PPIE for paediatric oncology research is needed. Further exploration into the role and responsibilities of patients, parents, and professionals when undertaking PPIE related activities is also recommended. Best practice examples from the UK, France, Germany, The Netherlands and Belgium demonstrated a preliminary evidence base from which a European PPIE strategy framework can be designed, inclusive of the patient and parent voice.

Specialist cancer services for teenagers and young adults in England: BRIGHTLIGHT research programme

Background

When cancer occurs in teenagers and young adults, the impact is far beyond the physical disease and treatment burden. The effect on psychological, social, educational and other normal development can be profound. In addition, outcomes including improvements in survival and participation in clinical trials are poorer than in younger children and older adults with similar cancers. These unique circumstances have driven the development of care models specifically for teenagers and young adults with cancer, often focused on a dedicated purpose-designed patient environments supported by a multidisciplinary team with expertise in the needs of teenagers and young adults. In England, this is commissioned by NHS England and delivered through 13 principal treatment centres. There is a lack of evaluation that identifies the key components of specialist care for teenagers and young adults, and any improvement in outcomes and costs associated with it.

Objective

To determine whether or not specialist services for teenagers and young adults with cancer add value.

Design

A series of multiple-methods studies centred on a prospective longitudinal cohort of teenagers and young adults who were newly diagnosed with cancer.

Settings

Multiple settings, including an international Delphi study of health-care professionals, qualitative observation in specialist services for teenagers and young adults, and NHS trusts.

Participants

A total of 158 international teenage and young adult experts, 42 health-care professionals from across England, 1143 teenagers and young adults, and 518 caregivers.

Main outcome measures

The main outcomes were specific to each project: key areas of competence for the Delphi survey; culture of teenagers and young adults care in the case study; and unmet needs from the caregiver survey. The primary outcome for the cohort participants was quality of life and the cost to the NHS and patients in the health economic evaluation.

Data sources

Multiple sources were used, including responses from health-care professionals through a Delphi survey and face-to-face interviews, interview data from teenagers and young adults, the BRIGHTLIGHT survey to collect patient-reported data, patient-completed cost records, hospital clinical records, routinely collected NHS data and responses from primary caregivers.

Results

Competencies associated with specialist care for teenagers and young adults were identified from a Delphi study. The key to developing a culture of teenage and young adult care was time and commitment. An exposure variable, the teenagers and young adults Cancer Specialism Scale, was derived, allowing categorisation of patients to three groups, which were defined by the time spent in a principal treatment centre: SOME (some care in a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults, and the rest of their care in either a children’s or an adult cancer unit), ALL (all care in a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults) or NONE (no care in a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults). The cohort study showed that the NONE group was associated with superior quality of life, survival and health status from 6 months to 3 years after diagnosis. The ALL group was associated with faster rates of quality-of-life improvement from 6 months to 3 years after diagnosis. The SOME group was associated with poorer quality of life and slower improvement in quality of life over time. Economic analysis revealed that NHS costs and travel costs were similar between the NONE and ALL groups. The ALL group had greater out-of-pocket expenses, and the SOME group was associated with greater NHS costs and greater expense for patients. However, if caregivers had access to a principal treatment centre for teenagers and young adults (i.e. in the ALL or SOME groups), then they had fewer unmet support and information needs.

Limitations

Our definition of exposure to specialist care using Hospital Episode Statistics-determined time spent in hospital was insufficient to capture the detail of episodes or account for the variation in specialist services. Quality of life was measured first at 6 months, but an earlier measure may have shown different baselines.

Conclusions

We could not determine the added value of specialist cancer care for teenagers and young adults as defined using the teenage and young adult Cancer Specialism Scale and using quality of life as a primary end point. A group of patients (i.e. those defined as the SOME group) appeared to be less advantaged across a range of outcomes. There was variation in the extent to which principal treatment centres for teenagers and young adults were established, and the case study indicated that the culture of teenagers and young adults care required time to develop and embed. It will therefore be important to establish whether or not the evolution in services since 2012–14, when the cohort was recruited, improves quality of life and other patient-reported and clinical outcomes.

Future work

A determination of whether or not the SOME group has similar or improved quality of life and other patient-reported and clinical outcomes in current teenage and young adult service delivery is essential if principal treatment centres for teenagers and young adults are being commissioned to provide ‘joint care’ models with other providers.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The BRIGHTLIGHT National Survey of the Impact of Specialist Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Care on Caregivers' Information and Support Needs

BACKGROUND

Teenage and young adult cancer services in England are centralized in 13 principal treatment centers (TYA-PTC). These "specialist services" are designed to support caregivers as well as young people.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether caregivers of young people with cancer had fewer unmet information and support needs if they had all/some care in a TYA-PTC.

METHODS

Participants in a cohort study of young people with cancer nominated their main carer to complete the BRIGHTLIGHT Carer Questionnaire, completed 6 months after diagnosis. Comparisons were made according to where young people's care was delivered: all, some, or no care in a TYA-PTC. Principal components analysis reduced the questionnaire to 5 dimensions, which were used as dependent variables in subsequent regression analysis.

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy-six responses of 514 returned questionnaires (92%) were included in the analysis. The majority of caregivers were white, middle-aged, married/cohabiting mothers. Adjusted analysis indicated caregivers who had all/some care in a TYA-PTC had more satisfaction with support and also with services specifically provided for carers. Those who had some TYA-PTC care had greater satisfaction with information but less opportunity to be involved in decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers of young people who had no TYA-PTC care have the most unmet information and support needs.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurses outside of the TYA-PTC need to be supported by the TYA-PTC in providing information/support for caregivers. When a young person is receiving care in multiple hospitals, nurses need to optimize opportunities for caregivers to be involved in decision making.

Longitudinal cohort study of the impact of specialist cancer services for teenagers and young adults on quality of life: outcomes from the BRIGHTLIGHT study

OBJECTIVES

In England, healthcare policy advocates specialised age-appropriate services for teenagers and young adults (TYA), those aged 13 to 24 years at diagnosis. Specialist Principal Treatment Centres (PTC) provide enhanced TYA age-specific care, although many still receive care in adult or children's cancer services. We present the first prospective structured analysis of quality of life (QOL) associated with the amount of care received in a TYA-PTC DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study.

SETTING

Hospitals delivering inpatient cancer care in England.

PARTICIPANTS

1114 young people aged 13 to 24 years newly diagnosed with cancer.

INTERVENTION

Exposure to the TYA-PTC defined as patients receiving NO-TYA-PTC care with those receiving ALL-TYA-PTC and SOME-TYA-PTC care.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Quality of life measured at five time points: 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months after diagnosis.

RESULTS

Group mean total QOL improved over time for all patients, but for those receiving NO-TYA-PTC was an average of 5.63 points higher (95% CI 2.77 to 8.49) than in young people receiving SOME-TYA-PTC care, and 4·17 points higher (95% CI 1.07 to 7.28) compared with ALL-TYA-PTC care. Differences were greatest 6 months after diagnosis, reduced over time and did not meet the 8-point level that is proposed to be clinically significant. Young people receiving NO-TYA-PTC care were more likely to have been offered a choice of place of care, be older, from more deprived areas, in work and have less severe disease. However, analyses adjusting for confounding factors did not explain the differences between TYA groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of some or all care in a TYA-PTC was associated with lower QOL shortly after cancer diagnosis. The NO-TYA-PTC group had higher QOL 3 years after diagnosis, however those receiving all or some care in a TYA-PTC experienced more rapid QOL improvements. Receipt of some care in a TYA-PTC requires further study.

'I actually felt like I was a researcher myself.' On involving children in the analysis of qualitative paediatric research in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the feasibility of a new approach to paediatric research whereby we involved children in analysing qualitative data, and to reflect on the involvement process.

SETTING

This was a single-centre, qualitative study in the Netherlands. It consisted of research meetings with individual children at home (Phase I) or group meetings at school (Phase II). In Phase I, we identified themes from a video interview during five one-on-one meetings between a child co-researcher and the adult researcher. In Phase II, during two group meetings, we explored the themes in detail using fragments from 16 interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

We involved 14 school children (aged 10 to 14 years) as co-researchers to analyse children's interviews about their experience while participating in medical research. Notes were taken, and children provided feedback. A thematic analysis was performed using a framework approach.

RESULTS

All co-researchers identified themes. The time needed to complete the task varied, as did the extent to which the meetings needed to be structured to improve concentration. The children rated time investment as adequate and they considered acting as co-researcher interesting and fun, adding that they had learnt new skills and gained new knowledge. The experience also led them to reflect on health matters in their own lives. The adult researchers considered the process relatively time intensive, but the project did result in a more critical assessment of their own work.

CONCLUSION

The new, two-phase approach of involving children to help analyse qualitative data is a feasible research method. The novelty lies in involving children to help identify themes from original interview data, thereby limiting preselection of data by adults, before exploring these themes in detail. Videos make it easier for children to understand the data and to empathise with the interviewees, and limits time investment.

BRIGHTLIGHT researchers as 'dramaturgs': creating There is a Light from complex research data

BACKGROUND

BRIGHTLIGHT is a national evaluation of cancer services for young people aged 13-24 years in England. It is a mixed methods study with six interlinked studies aiming to answer the question: do specialist cancer services for teenagers and young adults add value? http://www.brightlightstudy.com/. Young people have been integral to study development and management, working as co-researchers, consultants and collaborators throughout. We aimed to share results in a way that was meaningful to young people, the public, and multidisciplinary professionals. This paper reports the development of 'There is a Light: BRIGHTLIGHT', a theatrical interpretation of study results by young people, and offers insight into the impact on the cast, researchers and audiences.

METHODS

The BRIGHTLIGHT team collaborated with Contact Young Company, a youth theatre group in Manchester. Twenty members of Contact Young Company and four young people with cancer worked together over an eight-week period during which BRIGHTLIGHT results were shared along with explanations of cancer, healthcare policy and models of care in interactive workshops. Through their interpretation, the cast developed the script for the performance. The impact of the process and performance on the cast was evaluated through video diaries. The research team completed reflective diaries and audiences completed a survey.

RESULTS

'There is a Light' contained five acts and lasted just over an hour. It played 11 performances in six cities in the United Kingdom, to approximately 1377 people. After nine performances, a 30-min talk-back between members of the cast, creative team, an expert healthcare professional, and the audience was conducted, which was attended by at least half the audience. Analysis of cast diaries identified six themes: initial anxieties; personal development; connections; cancer in young people; personal impact; interacting with professionals. The cast developed strong trusting relationships with the team. Professionals stated they felt part of the process rather than sitting on the periphery sharing results. Both professional and lay audiences described the performance as meaningful and understandable. Feedback was particularly positive from those who had experienced cancer themselves.

CONCLUSIONS

Using theatre to present research enabled BRIGHTLIGHT results to be accessible to a larger, more diverse audience.

The support and information needs of adolescents and young adults with cancer when active treatment ends

Background

The end of active treatment is a period of high stress for young people with cancer, but limited literature exists about their information and support needs during this phase. This study aimed to understand the needs of young people with cancer, how these needs are currently being met, and how best to provide information and support at the end of active treatment.

Methods

This was a multi-stage, mixed methods study exploring the end of treatment experience from the perspectives of young people, and the healthcare professionals caring for them. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with healthcare professionals, which informed a survey administered nationally. Subsequently, semi-structured interviews were conducted with young people. These combined results informed a co-design workshop to develop recommendations.

Results

Telephone interviews were conducted with 12 healthcare professionals and 49 completed the online survey. A total of 11 young people aged 19–26 years (female = 8; 73%) were interviewed. The stakeholder workshop was attended by both healthcare professionals (n = 8) and young people (n = 3). At the end of treatment young people experience numerous ongoing physical issues including pain, fatigue and insomnia; in addition to a range of psychosocial and emotional issues including anxiety, fear of recurrence and isolation. The top three priorities for end of treatment care were: earlier provision and preparation around on-going impact of cancer and cancer treatment; standardised and continued follow-up of young people’s emotional well-being; and development of more information and resources specific to young people.

Conclusion

The access and availability of appropriate information and sources of support at the end of treatment is variable and inequitable. Young people’s needs would be more effectively met by timely, structured and accessible information, and support provision at the end of treatment to both prepare and enable adaptation across their transition to living with and beyond cancer. This will require both organisational and practical adjustments in care delivery, in addition to a renewed and updated understanding of what the ‘end of treatment’ transition process means.

Laying the groundwork: Building relationships for public and patient involvement in pre-clinical paediatric research

CONTEXT

Public and patient involvement is increasingly becoming an expectation of research funders and policy makers. Not all areas of health research are public-facing. Here, we outline an approach for building the skills and developing the relationships required for downstream public and patient involvement in pre-clinical adolescent rheumatology research.

OBJECTIVE

To design a methodology for improving researcher-adolescent communications specifically aimed at mutual relationship building for PPI. Deliberate and effective preparation in advance of research involvement to improve the downstream success of that involvement.

DESIGN

A research seminar and research skills workshop conducted entirely in 'plain English' for adolescents and their siblings aged 10-20. Upskilling of pre-clinical researchers for effective public involvement.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Study co-design between the voluntary charity Irish Children's Arthritis Network and the academic research centre UCD Centre for Arthritis Research. Fifteen adolescents aged 10-20 years old living with arthritis, four pre-clinical researchers and one qualitative researcher investigating adolescent or paediatric arthritis.

MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED

Relationship building and communications for effective downstream public involvement in pre-clinical and laboratory research.

RESULTS

The methodology outlined here was received extremely positively. Both researchers and adolescents living with arthritis felt more comfortable communicating, more knowledgeable about juvenile arthritis and research, and more able to engage in co-operative dialogue.

DISCUSSION

Engaging early, considering the needs of the community and developing appropriate involvement methodology can enable involvement in pre-clinical research.

CONCLUSIONS

Dedicating resources to building relationships and skills necessary for co-operative research involvement can overcome some of the barriers to public involvement in pre-clinical and laboratory-based research.

Description of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort: the evaluation of teenage and young adult cancer services in England

OBJECTIVE

International recognition of the unique needs of young people with cancer is growing. Many countries have developed specialist age-appropriate cancer services believing them to be of value. In England, 13 specialist principal treatment centres (PTCs) deliver cancer care to young people. Despite this expansion of specialist care, systematic investigation of associated outcomes and costs has, to date, been lacking. The aim of this paper is to describe recruitment and baseline characteristics of the BRIGHTLIGHT cohort and the development of the bespoke measures of levels of care and disease severity, which will inform the evaluation of cancer services in England.

DESIGN

Prospective, longitudinal, observational study.

SETTING

Ninety-seven National Health Service hospitals in England.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1114 participants were recruited and diagnosed between July 2012 and December 2014: 55% (n=618) were men, mean age was 20.1 years (SD=3.3), most (86%) were white and most common diagnoses were lymphoma (31%), germ cell tumour (19%) and leukaemia (13%).

RESULTS

At diagnosis, median quality of life score was significantly lower than a published control threshold (69.7 points); 40% had borderline to severe anxiety, and 21% had borderline to severe depression. There was minimal variation in other patient-reported outcomes according to age, diagnosis or severity of illness. Survival was lower in the cohort than for young people diagnosed during the same period who were not recruited (cumulative survival probability 4 years after diagnosis: 88% vs 92%).

CONCLUSIONS

Data collection was completed in March 2018. Longitudinal comparisons will determine outcomes and costs associated with access/exposure to PTCs. Findings will inform international intervention and policy initiatives to improve outcomes for young people with cancer.

Engaging children and families in pediatric Health Research: a scoping review

AIM

Patient engagement (PE) in pediatric health services research is challenging due to contextual factors such as busyness of parenting, work schedules, and diverse family structures. This scoping review seeks to comprehensively map current PE strategies with parents and families across existing published pediatric health research literature.

METHODS

We followed Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and Levac et al., (2010) six-stage scoping review process. We conducted the search strategy in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Psychinfo databases. Data were extracted from included articles; evidence tables were developed and narrative synthesis was completed.

RESULTS

Of 3925 retrieved records, seventeen articles were included in the review. Patient engagement primarily occurred through strategies such as advisory groups, meetings, focus groups and interviews. Strategies were used to engage patients at various levels, for different purposes (e.g., to inform, participate, consult, involve collaborate and/or lead). These strategies were also used at various stages of the research process. Navigating power differences, time and money were commonly reported challenges. Inconsistent terminology plagued (e.g., stakeholder engagement, consumer participation, patient and public involvement, participatory research) this body of literature and clarity is urgently needed.

CONCLUSIONS

This review offers insights into current PE strategies used in pediatric health services research and offers insight for researchers considering employing PE in the future.