ArticleJCPP advances2026
Young people's lived experience expertise: Insights from the DigiCAT project to develop a counterfactual analysis tool for mental health data.
Article in JCPP advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Constructs, Predictive Factors and Measures: Insights From the Mental Health in the Moment (MHIM) Co-Production Panel.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lived experience (LE) expertise is increasingly recognised as a vital component in mental health research. In our project to develop a digital tool for counterfactual analysis (DigiCAT), with an emphasis on researching active ingredients for adolescent mental health, we incorporated LE expertise across the lifecycle of tool development and dissemination. Methods: We consulted young person advisory groups (YPAGs; aged 11-18 years old) across three project phases-Discovery, Prototyping, and Dissemination-using structured discussions, ranking exercises, and iterative feedback loops to shape research priorities, tool design and user tutorials, and dissemination strategies of the tool. Results: The YPAGs advised on active ingredients and features of such ingredients that existing research has not taken into account. Examples include young person advisory group (YPAG) suggestions to prioritise research in social media, peer relationships, and teacher-student relationships. We incorporated these suggestions as illustrative examples in our tutorial paper introducing DigiCAT to our target audience, to demonstrate how insights from YPAGs can inform the use of the tool in research, by guiding areas of study. These areas were also prioritised in our own empirical analyses using the tool. Additionally, the YPAG contributed practical guidance on how to effectively involve youth LE experts in both research and digital tool development processes. Conclusions: The integration of LE expertise fundamentally shaped the development of our tutorial paper, influencing both its instructional components and its broader discussion of applications in mental health research. This project highlights the value of embedding LE perspectives into research guidance for software use, offering a model for future mental health and digital innovation initiatives.
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.