ArticleResearch involvement and engagement2026
"To make a positive difference": diverse youth perspectives on getting involved in mental health research.
Article in Research involvement and engagement, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental health problems amongst young people in the UK have been rising, yet many still do not receive appropriate support. Involving young people in research can lead to more inclusive services. However, certain groups of young people, including those from ethnic minority backgrounds, lower-income families, refugee, asylum-seeking and other immigrant backgrounds, non-native English speakers, disabled young people and those with long term health conditions remain under-represented in involvement in mental health research. Little research explores the perspectives of these young people on the barriers and enablers to their involvement.
methodsThis qualitative focus group study used the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) and Capability-Opportunity-Motivation model of behaviour (COM-B) to understand influencers on involvement. A group of youth advisors was involved throughout. Five focus groups were conducted, including 18 young people aged 16-25, many from under-represented backgrounds and without previous involvement experience. Thematic analysis was used to categorise barriers and enablers according to the COM-B model and intervention strategies proposed using intervention functions and behaviour change techniques which form part of the BCW.
resultsNineteen themes were identified covering all six COM-B domains. Enablers included the perceived value and relevance of the research topic, personal benefits (including financial reward and skill development), as well as safe and inclusive environments where young people of shared experiences come together. Barriers included lack of awareness and access to involvement opportunities, emotional readiness, social norms and the influence of peers. Some barriers were highlighted as particularly relevant to certain groups. Youth advisors provided additional reflections on the findings. BCW informed intervention strategies include proactive outreach efforts, effective preparation of young people (including induction and capacity building), the use of role models and partnership with cultural organisations.
conclusionsMany barriers to inclusive youth involvement in mental health research exist. Researchers need to look beyond traditional approaches to include under-represented young people in research. This study highlights enablers that researchers can capitalise on to improve access to involvement opportunities and BCW derived strategies, supported by evidence and young people's ideas, to overcome barriers. Future research should implement and evaluate these strategies in practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.