Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36698119›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2023

How do we best engage young people in decision-making about their health? A scoping review of deliberative priority setting methods.

Daniella Watson, Mimi Mhlaba, Gontse Molelekeng, Thulani Andrew Chauke, Sara Correia Simao, Sarah Jenner, Lisa J Ware, Mary Barker

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Young Adults' Views on Priority Health Issues and Their Involvement in Shaping Responses: A Qualitative Exploration in South Australia.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Oral Health in Young Adults: The Impact of Socioeconomic Factors and Health Literacy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Daniella WatsonGlobal Health Research Institute, Human Development and Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. daniella.watson@kcl.ac.uk.
Mimi MhlabaSAMRC Developmental Pathways for Health Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Gontse MolelekengSAMRC Developmental Pathways for Health Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Thulani Andrew ChaukeDepartment of Adult, College of Education, Community and Continuing Education, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.
Sara Correia SimaoMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sarah JennerMedical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Lisa J WareSAMRC Developmental Pathways for Health Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Mary BarkerGlobal Health Research Institute, Human Development and Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_MR/R018545/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/4Medical Research Council MR/N011848/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInternational 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.

methodsSeven 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.

findingsThe 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.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelNarrationAdolescentFamilyHumansAdolescentsHealth decisionsPriority settingScoping reviewYoung people

Identifiers

PMID36698119
PMCPMC9876416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.