ArticleBMJ global health2023
A collective autoethnography of coproduction in mental health research by academic researchers and young people in Brazil.
Article in BMJ global health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Conceptualising and operationalising 'patient and public involvement' (PPI) and 'responsible research and innovation' (RRI) in youth mental health research: a scoping review.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Review
- Partnering with people with lived experience in eating disorder research: conceptual and practical considerations.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Using the NASSS-Complexity Assessment Tool to Evaluate the Implementation of "Cadê O Kauê?": Chat-Story Intervention for Youth Participation in Mental Health Promotion in Brazil.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Exploring Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in youth mental health: reflections from researchers and young people.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- '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
- Towards Coproduction in Mental Health Academia: A Cooperative Inquiry.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
- Cadê o Kauê? Co-design and acceptability testing of a chat-story aimed at enhancing youth participation in the promotion of mental health in Brazil.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2025Article
- Young people's sense of agency and responsibility towards promoting mental health in Brazil: a reflexive thematic analysis.BMJ open · 2024Article
- No decision about me, without me: Collaborating with young people in mental health research.JCPP advances · 2024Article
- An Application of Evidence-Based Approaches to Engage Young People in the Design of a Global Mental Health Databank.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) approaches in mental health projects involving young people: a scoping review protocol.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCoproduction of mental health research and interventions involving researchers and young people is increasingly common. However, this model raises challenges, related, for instance, to communication, power and control. This paper narrates-from a collective first-person perspective-the lived experience of coproduction of a digital intervention by institutional researchers and young citizen researchers in Brazil.
methodThis study employed a collaborative autoethnographic methodology, utilising autobiographical data such as meeting recordings, individual notes and collective guided reflections on the coproduction process. Our analysis focused on challenges and solutions that arose during the process.
resultsThroughout the project, we created formal and informal mechanisms for accountability, transparency and fair inclusion of multiple voices. We engaged in mutual capacity-building, invested in building interpersonal knowledge, and implemented practices to reduce overload and promote equitable participation. Through ongoing reflection and readjustment in response to challenges, we progressively embraced more democratic and egalitarian values. The collective care invested in the process fostered synergy, trust, and intergroup friendship.
conclusionOur experience points to the value of creating a space for multiple research identities: the citizen young person and the institutional researcher, both of whom critically reflect on their roles in the research process. Our focus on coproduced care calls into question participation metaphors that represent the process via a single axis-young people-who linearly progress from minimal participation to full autonomy. Instead, our analysis highlights the importance of a social and caring bond that supports the radical co-production of innovative health solutions in contexts of vulnerability.
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.