Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40047285›Full record

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

Codesign of Mental Health Interventions With Young People From Racially Minoritised Populations: A Systematic Review of Methods and Outcomes.

Ishrat Shahnaz, Kelly Rose-Clarke, Daniel Michelson, Petra C Gronholm

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Co-Producing Training Resources to Improve Healthcare Experiences for Young Women and Reduce Gendered Health Inequalities.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Towards Coproduction in Mental Health Academia: A Cooperative Inquiry.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025
    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

4 authors.

Ishrat ShahnazDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0009-0007-4858-2360
Kelly Rose-ClarkeUCL Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8959-9184
Daniel MichelsonDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7370-8788
Petra C GronholmCentre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4482-6993

Funding

I.S. was funded by a PhD scholarship from the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission, UK. D.M. received support from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London (IS-BRC-1215-20018). P.C.G. was supported by the UK Medical Research Council (UKRI) in relation the Indigo Partnership (MR/R023697/1) award. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. For the purpose of Open Access, the authors have applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCodesign of mental health interventions entails the active involvement of end users and other stakeholders in various stages of the developmental process. This has emerged as a promising approach for developing evidence-based mental health interventions aligned with minoritised populations' needs and preferences. However, key questions remain about the methods and outcomes of codesign studies focused on young people from racially minoritised groups. The current review aimed to explore the codesign approaches and phases used in developing mental health interventions with young people from racially minoritised populations, analyse the codesign outcomes for participants and examine the contextual enablers and barriers impacting the codesign process.

methodsA systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Global Health, Web of Science and Scopus. Citations and references of included studies were also checked. Study quality and reporting of codesign were assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tools and the Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public-2 checklist. Data were synthesised using narrative synthesis, content analysis and meta-synthesis.

resultsEighteen eligible studies reported various codesign and participatory approaches, including community-based participatory research, co-production, human-centred design, youth and family codesign model, community engagement research, community development model, participatory evaluation model, participatory research design approach and community participatory research partnership. The most common codesign stages followed were exploring problems and solutions, ideating and creating, and refining. In terms of outcomes, the reported benefits of codesign for young people included personal development and well-being, enhanced knowledge and career skills, and better mental health outcomes. Codesigning with youth and other stakeholders (e.g., family members, other caregivers, community members and practitioners) also improved the research projects by identifying specific problems, increasing participant recruitment and enhancing data collection. Additionally, other stakeholders gained a platform to share their expertise, understand youth mental health and build capacity through codesign. Regarding enablers and barriers, reducing power differentials, fostering community engagement and collaboration with other stakeholders facilitated the codesign process, whereas barriers included lack of resources, power imbalances, lack of rapport building and selection bias.

conclusionsThis review outlines the potential benefits of codesign for developing mental health interventions for racially minoritised youth. These benefits include continuous stakeholder engagement to understand community needs better, reducing power differentials and building trust through culturally tailored activities and communication strategies. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and the public did not contribute directly to this review though the reviewed literature was specifically concerned with participatory research activities.

Indexed as

Mental HealthMental Health ServicesAdolescentCommunity-Based Participatory ResearchHumansMental Disorderscodesignmental health interventionracially minoritised groupsyoung people

Identifiers

PMID40047285
PMCPMC11883660

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.