ArticleThe patient2021
Don't Forget the Caregivers! A Discrete Choice Experiment Examining Caregiver Views of Integrated Youth Services.
Article in The patient, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Virtual Service Delivery in Mental Health and Substance Use Care: A Systematic Review of Preference Elicitation Studies.Community mental health journal · 2025Pooled it
- Parent and Adolescent Preferences for Online Youth Mental Health Support Programs: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2026Article
- 'Kids have really no way to access support, especially without their parents knowing': a qualitative study of access to mental health support among adolescents.Cogent mental health · 2025Article
- What's it gonna take? Lessons learned for youth-friendly mental health services research.Frontiers in health services · 2025Article
- Youth not engaged in education, employment, or training: a discrete choice experiment of service preferences in Canada.BMC public health · 2024Article
- What do justice-involved youth want from integrated youth services? A conjoint analysis.Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry = Journal de l'Academie canadienne de psychiatrie de l'enfant et de l'adolescent · 2024Article
- A Feasibility Study of the SAFE Pilot Program: A University-School Board Partnership in Ontario.Research on social work practice · 2024Article
- Youth Perspectives on Integrated Youth Services: A Discrete Choice Conjoint Experiment.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2022Article
- Becoming our young people's case managers: caregivers' experiences, needs, and ideas for improving opioid use treatments for young people using opioids.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2022Article
- Service providers endorse integrated services model for youth with mental health and substance use challenges: findings from a discrete choice experiment.BMC health services research · 2021Article
- Integrated Youth Service Preferences of Caregivers of Justice-Involved Youth: A Discrete Choice Conjoint Experiment.International journal of integrated careArticle
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
Abstract
backgroundThe design and implementation of community-based integrated youth service hubs (IYSHs) is burgeoning around the world. This collaborative model of care aims to address barriers in youth service access by designing services that meet the needs of youth and caregivers. However, heterogeneity across models requires a better understanding of the preferences for key service characteristics.
methodA discrete choice experiment was conducted among 274 caregivers of youth aged 14-29 years with mental health challenges. The experiment consisted of 12 attributes with four levels each, representing different service components; additional measures were collected, including demographics and burden assessments. Utility values were calculated, representing the degree of preference for a given level of an attribute. Latent class analysis was conducted to understand subgroups with different service preferences, identifying three latent classes with differing IYSH service preferences.
resultsThe largest class (n = 173, 63.1%), entitled 'Comprehensive, Integrative Service Access', strongly valued practical aspects of service design, such as rapid access and support for a wide range of needs. The 'Service Process Features' class (n = 67, 24.5%) expressed a relative prioritization of process features of service access, while the smaller 'Caregiver Involvement' (n = 34, 12.4%) class most highly prioritized caregiver involvement in their youths' services. Similar demographic characteristics and caregiver burden were found across classes, although participants in the Caregiver Involvement latent class were supporting younger youth. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsCaregivers have diverse youth service preferences and relative priorities that should be taken into account when designing services. System designers and service providers are encouraged to take caregivers' preferences and priorities into account, alongside youth priorities, whether designing service delivery models or an individual service plan for a youth.
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.