ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2025
Youth patient and public involvement in health research in the Netherlands: experiences from a multi-stakeholder interview study.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Children's participation in the development and evaluation of parent-led interventions for children's mental health: a scoping review and consultation with children.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2026Review
- Trends in patient and public involvement in health research 2000-2024.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Review
- Evaluation Tools for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in Health Research: A Scoping Review.The patient · 2026Article
- Engaging Children and Young People in Pediatric Palliative Care Research: A Scoping Review Protocol of Patient and Public Involvement Practices.HRB open research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile patient and public involvement in health research is becoming gradually more common, there is still only limited involvement from children and adolescents. Especially in funded (health) research, youth has been found to be a hard to reach and vulnerable group. Previous literature argues that a responsive approach is needed. To obtain more insights into how such an approach can be perpetuated in funded health research projects, this study evaluated the experiences with youth involvement in health research from a multi-stakeholder perspective.
methodsYouth involvement was evaluated in eight projects of six subsidy programs for health research. The RE-AIM model was used as an evaluation framework. This framework is useful to evaluate interventions on multiple levels (both on an individual and setting level), which makes it very applicable to a multi-stakeholder evaluation. For the evaluation, 24 in-depth interviews with seven program managers, six committee members, ten researchers, and six youth participants were performed.
resultsIn the programs, approaches were used that are responsive to the context of the young participants such as a diverse, indirect and personal engagement approaches. Yet, difficulties in adapting to the needs of youth remain to exist due to the inflexible structure of the funded research process and limited time to explore diverse participation activities at multiple moments. As a result, the engagement of youth with a migration background or disability, were impeded.
conclusionTo successfully implement youth patient and public involvement within funded health research, subsidy providers should allocate the necessary resources to create space for being responsive to the needs of young people.
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.