Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: Undertaking collaborative research with young people could result in more relevant research and policy. However, there remains a limited understanding of the barriers and facilitators to meaningfully working with young people. This scoping review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators of engaging young people in codesign research processes. METHODS: This scoping review drew on methodological guidance from JBI. Searches were conducted in Proquest, Scopus, Informit, and Science Direct for relevant peer-reviewed publications for the period of January 2003-August 2023. Publications were included if they used the term codesign and/or related participatory research methods with young people aged 15-24 years. Two independent reviewers undertook all stages of screening and data extraction, with consensus reached at each stage of the study. Qualitative content analysis was used to group results into key themes. RESULTS: The search yielded 1334 publications, with 41 meeting inclusion criteria. Publications varied with respect to the age range of included young people, and focused on a variety of populations, including young people with mental ill-health, with disabilities, First Nations youth, and young people involved with specific services or programs. In analyzing the barriers and facilitators to engaging young people in co-designed research we found overall that facilitators included consistent funding, dedicated staff, flexible methods, and youth involvement as co-creators, supported by community networks and extended timelines. Key barriers were limited resources, staff capacity, and logistical challenges like recruitment, transportation, and external responsibilities, which hinder participation. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, there is no universal approach to codesign; instead, every project depends on the interplay of various factors. Elements such as resources, communication, process, agency, investment, and relationships can either facilitate or hinder progress, depending on how they are handled. A project that effectively incorporates these interconnected and interdependent factors is much more likely to foster meaningful and lasting collaboration. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was a scoping review and did not involve patients, service users, caregivers, individuals with lived experience, young people, or members of the public in its design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or preparation. While the nature of the research-focused on synthesising the existing literature-did not necessitate direct involvement, the absence of young people's participation is acknowledged as a limitation. Nevertheless, the findings are intended to inform future participatory research practices that centre and engage young people and other stakeholders in meaningful, collaborative ways.
Lipton et al. (Tue,) studied this question.