Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39832210›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2025

Best Practices Guidelines for the Engagement of People With Lived Experience and Family Members in Mental Health and Substance Use Health Research: A Modified Delphi Consensus Study.

Lisa D Hawke, Wuraola Dada-Phillips, Hajar Seiyad, Josh Orson, Lianne Goldsmith, Susan Conway, Adam Jordan, Natasha Y Sheikhan, Melissa Hiebert, Sean Kidd and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Meta-Research on the Science of Lived Experience Engagement in Mental Health and Substance Use Health Research: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Co-Production With Mental Health Family Carers: The Value, Outcomes and Benefits for Family Carers and Academic Researchers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

11 authors.

Lisa D HawkeCAMH Education Research, University of Toronto Department of Psychiatry, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1108-9453
Wuraola Dada-PhillipsCAMH Education Research, Toronto, Canada.
Hajar SeiyadCAMH Patient and Family Engagement Core, Toronto, Canada.
Josh OrsonCAMH Patient and Family Engagement Core, Toronto, Canada.
Lianne GoldsmithCAMH Patient and Family Engagement Core, Toronto, Canada.
Susan ConwayCAMH Patient and Family Engagement Core, Toronto, Canada.
Adam JordanCAMH Patient and Family Engagement Core, Toronto, Canada.
Natasha Y SheikhanCAMH Education Research, University of Toronto Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0471-4735
Melissa HiebertCAMH Patient and Family Engagement Core, Toronto, Canada.
Sean KiddCAMH Slaight Family Centre for Youth in Transition, University of Toronto Department of Psychiatry, Toronto, Canada.
Kerry KuluskiUniversity of Toronto Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Trillium Health Partners Institute for Better Health, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6377-6653

Funding

This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (#190372).
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPeople with lived experience of mental health and/or substance use conditions and their families (PWLE) are increasingly engaged in research, yet rigorous guidelines for engagement are lacking. This study aims to co-design best practice guidelines to support the authentic, meaningful engagement of PWLE in mental health and/or substance use health research.

methodsA multi-panel modified Delphi study was conducted with 61 expert panelists (35 PWLE and family members, 26 researchers/research support staff from across Canada). Participants rated 56 recommendations for importance and clarity. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% of participants rating items at 6 or 7 on a 7-point Likert scale ('very important' or 'essential'). Qualitative feedback was analysed using content analysis to identify new items and reviewed for improvements in item clarity. After each round, items not meeting the established threshold of importance were removed. Items with low clarity scores were reworded. A PWLE advisory panel was actively involved throughout the study's design, implementation, interpretation, and reporting, ensuring that the perspectives of people with lived experience were integrated throughout the research process.

resultsThree Delphi Rounds were conducted. In Round 1, importance ratings ranged from 51.7% to 96.7% of participants ranking the items above the established threshold (average 80.1%), with clarity ratings ranging from 39.3% to 86.9% (average 70.7%) and an average importance coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.16. Four items were deleted, two new items were added and fifty-five items were revised. In Round 2, 60 (98.4%) participants responded. Importance ratings ranged from 57.6% to 96.7% (average 80.2%; average CV = 0.20). Clarity ratings ranged from 50.9% to 93.2% (average 77.9%). Five items were deleted and eleven revised. In Round 3, 60 (98.4%) participants provided importance ratings ranging from 66.7% to 98.3% (average 80.8%; average CV = 0.20), and clarity ratings ranging from 63.3% to 94.9% (average 81.1%). Three items were deleted and nine were revised. Forty-four final best practices are proposed.

conclusionThese co-developed best practice guidelines offer recommendations for meaningful PWLE engagement in mental health and/or substance use health research. By following these guidelines, research teams can ensure that PWLE contributions are genuinely valued and effectively integrated, ultimately enhancing the quality and impact of the research and fostering authentic collaboration. PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: People with lived experience were engaged throughout the project as key team members, from a patient-oriented research perspective. They are also co-authors on this manuscript.

Indexed as

FamilyMental DisordersMental HealthPractice Guidelines as TopicSubstance-Related DisordersAdultCanadaConsensusDelphi TechniqueFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Agedbest practice guidelinesengagement in researchmental healthpatient engagementpeople with lived experiencesubstance use

Identifiers

PMID39832210
PMCPMC11745228

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.