Search

Objective: Integrated youth services (IYS) are an emerging model of care offering a broad range of mental health and social services for youth in one location. This study aimed to determine the IYS service characteristics most important to youth, as well as to determine whether different classes of youth have different service preferences, and if so, what defines these classes. Methods: Ontario youth aged 14–29 years with mental health challenges were recruited to participate in a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. The DCE contained 12 attributes, each represented by 4 levels representing core characteristics of IYS models. To supplement the DCE questions, demographic information was collected and a mental health screener was administered. Preferences were examined, latent class analyses were conducted, and latent classes were compared. Results: As a whole, participants endorsed the IYS model of service delivery. Among 274 youth, there were three latent classes: 1) the Focused Service (37.6%) latent class prioritized efficient delivery of mental health services. 2) The Holistic Services (30.3%) latent class prioritized a diverse array of mental health and social services delivered in a timely fashion. 3) The Responsive Services (32.1%) latent class prioritized services that matched the individual needs of the youth being served. Differences between classes were observed based on sociodemographic and clinical variables. Conclusions: IYS is an acceptable model of care, in that it prioritizes components that reflect youth preferences. The differences in preference profiles of different groups of youth point to the need for flexible models of service delivery. Service design initiatives should take these preferences into account, designing services that meet the needs and preferences of a broad range of youth. Working locally to co-design services with the youth in the target population who wish to be engaged will help meet the needs of youth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are growing calls to engage service users in research about issues relevant to them. Youth and family members can make meaningful contributions to research projects, improving quality and relevance. However, more information is needed on the contributions that youth and family members can make to various study designs. Objective: This paper describes the contributions that youth and family members have made to a multi‐site pragmatic randomized‐controlled trial, YouthCan IMPACT, and the way project‐based engagement learnings accelerated change at the institutional level and beyond. Results: Youth and family members were full members of the project team, including the project's core governance and working groups. They contributed to project leadership, as funding co‐applicants and as equal members of the governance team. They were also engaged in study design. Youth defined the primary outcome measure and contributed to decisions on all secondary measures. The service pathway was co‐designed with youth and family members; for example, they guided the inclusion of peer support and a family member intervention as core service components. Study implementation contributions included ensuring a youth‐ and family‐friendly research process and training research staff on working with youth and family members. Knowledge translation activities have included youth and family members as co‐presenters and manuscript co‐authors. The learnings from this trial have been leveraged to expand youth and family engagement at the institution and beyond. Conclusions: Youth and family members make substantial contributions to complex research projects, including randomized‐controlled trials, thereby improving project design, study implementation, associated interventions, and knowledge translation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]