How do we best engage young people in decision-making about their health? A scoping review of deliberative priority setting methods
- PMID: 36698119
- PMCID: PMC9876416
- DOI: 10.1186/s12939-022-01794-2
How do we best engage young people in decision-making about their health? A scoping review of deliberative priority setting methods
Abstract
Introduction: International organisations have called to increase young people's involvement in healthcare and health policy development. We currently lack effective methods for facilitating meaningful engagement by young people in health-related decision-making. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify deliberative priority setting methods and explore the effectiveness of these in engaging young people in healthcare and health policy decision-making.
Methods: Seven databases were searched systematically, using MeSH and free text terms, for articles published in English before July 2021 that described the use of deliberative priority setting methods for health decision-making with young people. All titles, abstracts and full-text papers were screened by a team of six independent reviewers between them. Data extraction followed the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines. The results are presented as a narrative synthesis, structured around four components for evaluating deliberative processes: 1) representation and inclusion of diverse participants, 2) the way the process is run including levels and timing of participant engagement, 3) the quality of the information provided to participants and 4) resulting outcomes and decisions.
Findings: The search yielded 9 reviews and 21 studies. The more engaging deliberative priority setting tools involved young people-led committees, mixed methods for identifying and prioritising issues and digital data collection and communication tools. Long-term and frequent contact with young people to build trust underpinned the success of some of the tools, as did offering incentives for taking part and skills development using creative methods. The review also suggests that successful priority setting processes with young people involve consideration of power dynamics, since young people's decisions are likely to be made together with family members, health professionals and academics.
Discussion: Young people's engagement in decision-making about their health is best achieved through investing time in building strong relationships and ensuring young people are appropriately rewarded for their time and contribution. If young people are to be instrumental in improving their health and architects of their own futures, decision-making processes need to respect young people's autonomy and agency. Our review suggests that methods of power-sharing with young people do exist but that they have yet to be adopted by organisations and global institutions setting global health policy.
Keywords: Adolescents; Health decisions; Priority setting; Scoping review; Young people.
© 2023. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
None.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001. JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009. PMID: 27820426
-
Qualitative evidence synthesis informing our understanding of people's perceptions and experiences of targeted digital communication.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 23;10(10):ED000141. doi: 10.1002/14651858.ED000141. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31643081 Free PMC article.
-
Impact of summer programmes on the outcomes of disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people: A systematic review.Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 13;20(2):e1406. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1406. eCollection 2024 Jun. Campbell Syst Rev. 2024. PMID: 38873396 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Exploring the strategies and components of interventions to build adolescent awareness about stunting prevention in West Java: A qualitative study.PLoS One. 2024 Dec 5;19(12):e0314651. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314651. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 39637016 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of Self-Efficacy and Knowledge of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination among Various Types of Decision Makers in Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2025 Jan 1;13(1):28-39. doi: 10.30476/ijcbnm.2024.101802.2448. eCollection 2025 Jan. Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2025. PMID: 39906253 Free PMC article.
-
What works in engaging communities? Prioritising nutrition interventions in Burkina Faso, Ghana and South Africa.PLoS One. 2023 Dec 13;18(12):e0294410. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294410. eCollection 2023. PLoS One. 2023. PMID: 38091334 Free PMC article.
-
Racial, Lifestyle, and Healthcare Contributors to Perceived Cancer Risk among Physically Active Adolescent and Young Adult Women Aged 18-39 Years.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 May 8;20(9):5740. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20095740. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023. PMID: 37174256 Free PMC article.
-
Creating meaningful knowledge exchange between young people and public health practitioners: what role can researchers play?Perspect Public Health. 2024 Jul;144(4):212-214. doi: 10.1177/17579139241230852. Perspect Public Health. 2024. PMID: 39108129 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
References
-
- Arro R. Children and adolescents deserve a better future. Lancet. 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00006-X. - PubMed
-
- UNICEF . The state of the World's children 2011: adolescence - an age of opportunity. New York: UNICEF; 2011.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources