ArticleDevelopmental cognitive neuroscience2026
Co-designing research priorities in developmental neuroscience: A place-based participatory priority-setting study.
Article in Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Children and adolescents, the primary participants in developmental neuroscience research, are rarely consulted or included in the research design process. By neglecting their perspectives and needs, we risk limiting the relevance and effectiveness of translational research that may emerge from this work. Here, we report on a process of co-design with adolescents to inform the generation of a new population neuroimaging research programme. We employed a two-study community-based participatory approach and used mixed methods to identify the research priorities of this community. In the first study, 79 secondary school students from four schools were introduced to fundamental neuroscience concepts during five one-hour workshops. In groups, they then designed research studies, centred around topics they deemed important, and were asked to present their ideas through poster presentations, role playing as neuroscientists. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted on these posters, extracting ten key themes. In the second study, 376 students from four different schools, ranked these ten themes in order of importance. Mental health and stress consistently emerged as the highest priorities. Further exploratory analysis revealed that the priority for exploring everyday routines and understanding anti-social behaviours varied across schools and age groups, while the importance of mental health varied significantly between genders. This work provides an illustration of how to implement place-based participatory approaches at the early stages of a developmental neuroscience research project to maximise inclusivity and potential downstream translation and impact.
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.