ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2023
"We know that our voices are valued, and that people are actually going to listen": co-producing an evaluation of a young people's research advisory group.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Co-designing research priorities in developmental neuroscience: A place-based participatory priority-setting study.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- A Youth-Led Evaluation of Adolescent Involvement in a Project on Development of Guidelines for Adolescent Involvement in Health Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Understanding school-based rehabilitation services through the lived experiences of children and youth with disabilities: a meta-aggregative review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- 'Co-Production Is Caring': Young People's Reflections on Responsible and Dialogic Co-Production in Youth Mental Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Active involvement of children aged 11-12 years in the development of a healthy nutrition intervention - a qualitative evaluation from researchers' and children's perspectives.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Public Involvement in Complex Theorising: A Co-Produced Logic Model of the Role of Context in Shaping Child Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Emerging practice in mental health patient and public involvement research advisory groups: a narrative review.BMC psychiatry · 2025Review
- Patients, parents and professional perspectives on molecular radiotherapy for neuroblastoma and paediatric neuroendocrine cancers.Nuclear medicine communications · 2025Article
- Exploring Experiences and Designing Guidance for Involving and Engaging Children and Young People in James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnerships.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- "I am there just to get on with it": a qualitative study on the labour of the patient and public involvement workforce.Health research policy and systems · 2024Article
- Applying co-production principles in research: reflections from young people and academics.Childhood (Copenhagen, Denmark) · 2024Article
- Radiation Reveal: Moving from research engagement to involvement.British journal of cancer · 2024Review
- Ready, set, co(produce): a co-operative inquiry into co-producing research to explore adolescent health and wellbeing in the Born in Bradford Age of Wonder project.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE): how valuable and how hard? An evaluation of ALL_EARS@UoS PPIE group, 18 months on.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- 'Including us, talking to us and creating a safe environment'-Youth patient and public involvement and the Walking In ScHools (WISH) Study: Lessons learned.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Engaging children and adolescents in the design and conduct of paediatric research.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- Article
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
backgroundChildren and young people's (CYP) involvement is an increasing priority in UK healthcare and in heath research, alongside recognition that involving CYP in research requires different considerations to involving adults. Underpinned by children's rights and a co-production ethos this paper, co-authored with young evaluators, explores the learning from a co-produced evaluation of eyeYPAG, a young persons' research advisory group (YPAG) for eye and vision research based at Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, UK.
methodsA team of young evaluators, supported by the eyeYPAG facilitator, conducted focus groups and online surveys with YPAG members, their parents and carers, researchers, group facilitators and funders. Qualitative data was analysed using a collaborative reflexive thematic analysis approach. Quantitative data, limited by the small number of participants, was analysed in Excel and reported as descriptive data.
resultsCYP valued the social and creative aspects of the group as well as learning about research and developing skills and confidence. Learning was a two-way process, with both researchers and facilitators reflecting on how much they had learnt from working with the YPAG. All participants talked about the importance of impact, feeling that CYP are making a difference to research, as well as CYP's right to be involved. Effective planning and facilitation were key to the success of the group, in relation to accessibility and the development and delivery of sessions both online and in-person. Resourcing and administration were key challenges to this, as was engaging researchers who were not already converted to the public involvement cause. As the nature of a YPAG is that it primarily focuses on advising researcher-led projects, co-production was identified as something that the group was 'working towards', including through this evaluation. Co-producing with CYP involves building up knowledge, confidence and acknowledging power dynamics.
conclusionsCo-producing an evaluation enabled us to learn about the benefits and challenges of involving CYP in research, as well as how to involve them in the development of that evidence. An ethos of co-production and children's rights helped to shift the balance of power and develop more engaging and inclusive ways of working.
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.