Lipton Briony, Dickinson Helen, Bailie Jodie, Hewitt Belinda, Kavanagh Anne, Aitken Zoe, Shields Marissa
School of Business, UNSW Canberra, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Health Expect. 2025 Jun;28(3):e70308. doi: 10.1111/hex.70308.
Undertaking collaborative research with young people could result in more relevant research and policy. However, there remains a limited understanding of the barriers and facilitators to meaningfully working with young people. This scoping review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators of engaging young people in codesign research processes.
This scoping review drew on methodological guidance from JBI. Searches were conducted in Proquest, Scopus, Informit, and Science Direct for relevant peer-reviewed publications for the period of January 2003-August 2023. Publications were included if they used the term codesign and/or related participatory research methods with young people aged 15-24 years. Two independent reviewers undertook all stages of screening and data extraction, with consensus reached at each stage of the study. Qualitative content analysis was used to group results into key themes.
The search yielded 1334 publications, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria. Publications varied with respect to the age range of included young people, and focused on a variety of populations, including young people with mental ill-health, with disabilities, First Nations youth, and young people involved with specific services or programs. In analyzing the barriers and facilitators to engaging young people in co-designed research we found overall that facilitators included consistent funding, dedicated staff, flexible methods, and youth involvement as co-creators, supported by community networks and extended timelines. Key barriers were limited resources, staff capacity, and logistical challenges like recruitment, transportation, and external responsibilities, which hinder participation.
In conclusion, there is no universal approach to codesign; instead, every project depends on the interplay of various factors. Elements such as resources, communication, process, agency, investment, and relationships can either facilitate or hinder progress, depending on how they are handled. A project that effectively incorporates these interconnected and interdependent factors is much more likely to foster meaningful and lasting collaboration.
This study was a scoping review and did not involve patients, service users, caregivers, individuals with lived experience, young people, or members of the public in its design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or preparation. While the nature of the research-focused on synthesising the existing literature-did not necessitate direct involvement, the absence of young people's participation is acknowledged as a limitation. Nevertheless, the findings are intended to inform future participatory research practices that centre and engage young people and other stakeholders in meaningful, collaborative ways.
与年轻人开展合作研究可能会产生更具相关性的研究成果和政策。然而，对于与年轻人进行有意义合作的障碍和促进因素，人们的了解仍然有限。本综述旨在确定让年轻人参与协同设计研究过程的障碍和促进因素。
本综述借鉴了循证卫生保健国际协作网（JBI）的方法学指导。在Proquest、Scopus、Informit和ScienceDirect数据库中检索2003年1月至2023年8月期间相关的同行评审出版物。如果出版物使用了协同设计一词和/或与15至24岁年轻人相关的参与式研究方法，则将其纳入。两名独立评审员负责筛选和数据提取的所有阶段，并在研究的每个阶段达成共识。采用定性内容分析法将结果归纳为关键主题。
检索共获得1334篇出版物，其中41篇符合纳入标准。这些出版物所纳入的年轻人年龄范围各不相同，且关注的人群多种多样，包括患有精神疾病的年轻人、残疾年轻人、原住民青年以及参与特定服务或项目的年轻人。在分析让年轻人参与协同设计研究的障碍和促进因素时，我们总体发现促进因素包括持续的资金、专职人员、灵活的方法，以及年轻人作为共同创造者的参与，这些都得到社区网络和延长时间线的支持。关键障碍包括资源有限、人员能力不足以及诸如招募、交通和外部职责等后勤挑战，这些都阻碍了参与。
总之，协同设计没有通用的方法；相反，每个项目都取决于各种因素的相互作用。资源、沟通、流程、机构、投入和关系等要素，根据其处理方式的不同，既可能促进也可能阻碍进展。一个有效整合这些相互关联和相互依存因素的项目更有可能促成有意义且持久的合作。
本研究是一项综述，在设计、实施、分析、解释或准备过程中未涉及患者、服务使用者、护理人员、有实际经验的个人、年轻人或公众。虽然本研究的性质——侧重于综合现有文献——并不需要直接参与，但承认没有年轻人的参与是一项局限。尽管如此，研究结果旨在为未来的参与式研究实践提供参考，这些实践以年轻人和其他利益相关者为中心，并以有意义的合作方式让他们参与进来。
