ReviewInternet interventions2025
The use of co-design with young people for digital mental health support development: A systematic review.
Review in Internet interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Toward Participatory Precision Health With Co-Designed Recommendations: Systematic Review of Just-in-Time Adaptive Interventions in Adolescents and Young Adults.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Global practices in adapting cognitive behavioral therapy for ethnoracial populations with substance use disorders: a scoping review of adaptation strategies, treatment outcomes, and geographic gaps.International journal of mental health systems · 2026Article
- Examining the Characteristics of Adolescents Recruited to a Novel Digital Treatment for Eating Disorders: Baseline Assessment in an Open Feasibility Trial.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2026Article
- Coproduction Without Youth? Closing the Participation Gap in Digital Mental Health Research.JMIR mental health · 2026Article
- Co-Creation of Mental Health Intervention for Adolescents: A Social Hackathon Approach.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The acceptability, adherence, and preliminary effectiveness of a digital treatment for adolescents with subthreshold eating disorders. Findings from an open feasibility trial in routine clinical care.Journal of eating disorders · 2026Article
- Inspiring That EUREKA Moment: The Importance of Patient Co-Design of Outputs from interRAI Assessments.Healthcare management forum · 2026Article
- Co-Designing a Virtual Reality Intervention for Adolescents With Psychosis.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2026Article
- An adaptive, youth-centred co-design methodology: place-based co-design centring youth and community participation.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- Reimagining paediatric care: technology, trust, and the global movement for child-centred innovation.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Translating innovation into impact: a national policy dialogue on scaling and integrating evidence-based supportive text messaging into Canada's mental health care systems.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Co-design methods offer an opportunity to meaningfully involve young people in research to ensure that designed supports are useable and responsive to their needs. However, how co-design is currently being applied with young people in the digital mental health field is unclear. This review aimed to critically synthesise the use of co-design with young people to design or modify digital mental health interventions and supports. Six databases were searched for empirical papers published in English from 2012 onwards. Papers were included if they reported on young people aged up to 25 years of age who were involved in the co-design of an online mental health intervention or support. A narrative synthesis of 30 papers meeting these specific criteria was completed. The results highlighted an interchangeable and inconsistent terminology used to described co-design and related approaches across papers. The level of inclusion of young people varied and there was a lack of consideration for power dynamics. Future research should aim to establish a clear and consistent definition and terminology for co-design along with a rigorous gold-standard framework for reporting co-design in order to ensure the process is being carried out in line with its original purpose. Implications for research and practice in the youth co-design field are discussed.
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.