ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2016
What does quality healthcare look like to adolescents and young adults? Ask the experts!
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating health service outcomes of public involvement in health service design in high-income countries: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2021Pooled it
- Antidepressant discontinuation in France from an intersectional perspective: a discrete-time survival analysis within the MAIHDA framework.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Benefits, barriers and recommendations for youth engagement in health research: combining evidence-based and youth perspectives.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Review
- Youth preferences for healthcare providers and healthcare interactions: a qualitative study.BMC primary care · 2024Article
- Optimising care and follow-up of adults with achondroplasia.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2022Article
- Adolescent and young adult patients as co-researchers: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Healthcare Quality: A Concept Analysis.Nursing forum · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is widely recognised that developmentally appropriate services for adolescents and young people improve both healthcare experience and health outcomes. However, there is limited evidence of using young people's expertise to evaluate services, or of young people participating in service developments or design to meet their healthcare needs. This report covers both the process and outcomes of a collaborative project with a group of young people (aged 17-25 years) who are 'experts by experience'. We used qualitative mixed methodology to derive themes from narrative accounts of these young people's healthcare experiences to develop an assessment framework that they identified as being relevant to evaluating services. Informing young people about other assessment measures currently in use (including the Department of Health's You're Welcome quality criteria) enabled the group to further develop their views and refine their proposed assessment framework. This paper is co-authored with young people, enabling them to directly voice their views about healthcare services. Reflections on this process and recommendations for working more collaboratively with young people to evaluate healthcare services are also given.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.