‘It's Powerful’ The impact of involving children and young people in developing paediatric research agendas

A qualitative interview study

Bibliographic Data

ID19508358
AuthorsLaura Postma (0009-0007-4873-5822, Beatrix Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen University of Groningen Groningen The Netherlands, corresponding author), Malou L Luchtenberg (Beatrix Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen University of Groningen Groningen The Netherlands), Malou Luchtenberg (0000-0002-9459-772X, University Medical Center Groningen), Eduard Verhagen (0000-0001-9555-6922, University Medical Center Groningen), A A Eduard Verhagen (Beatrix Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen University of Groningen Groningen The Netherlands), Els Maeckelberghe (0000-0002-3983-6089, University Medical Center Groningen), Els L M Maeckelberghe (Beatrix Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Groningen University of Groningen Groningen The Netherlands)
Year2024
Volume27
Issue2
Pagese14028-e14028
Publication date2024-04-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Expectations (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1369-6513 • E-ISSN: 1369-7625
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/hex.14028
PMID38613790
OpenAlexW4394787436
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited35

INTRODUCTION: There is a growing consensus that children and young people (CYP) should be involved in matters that concern them. Progress is made in involving CYP in developing pediatric research agendas (PRAs), although the impact of their involvement remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate the impact of involving CYP in developing PRAs and assess the extent to which postpatient and public involvement (post-PPI) activities were planned. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using in-depth interviews to identify and gain an in-depth understanding of the impact of involving CYP in developing PRAs. The transcripts were uploaded to Atlas.ti to be coded and organised. Dutch-language interviews were analysed and interpreted together with vocational education and training (VET) students. These students were aged between 14 and 18 years and were training to become nurses. RESULTS: Three CYP and 15 researchers decided to participate. We focused on three categories of impact: agenda-setting impact, individual impact and academic impact. Involving CYP creates a more enriched and clarified agenda. It ensured that both CYP and researchers underwent personal or professional growth and development, it created a connection between the people involved, awareness about the importance of involving CYP and it ensured that the people involved had a positive experience. The participants were unable to indicate the academic impact of their PRAs, but they did understand the key factors for creating it. In addition, the need to measure impact was highlighted, with a particular focus on assessing individual impact. DISCUSSION: Our study outlines the diverse subthemes of impact that arise from involving CYP in developing PRAs. Despite the potential of research agendas to amplify CYP voices, only a minority of researchers strategized post-PPI activities ensuring impactful outcomes, prompting the need for thorough evaluation of various impact forms and consistent alignment with the overarching goal of transforming the research field. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We involved VET students in the data analysis and interpretation phase by forming a young person advisory group. The data analysis of the interviews analysed by the VET students revealed four distinct themes: 1. Learnt new knowledge. 2. Learnt to collaborate. 3. Learnt to listen. 4. Assessment of the individual impact

Business · Focus group · Medical education · Pedagogy · Political science · Public relations · Qualitative research · Social science · Sociology · Vocational education · Ethics in Clinical Research · Health Policy Implementation Science · Medicine · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Psychology · Marketing

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access