Search

Background: The term 'care‐experienced' refers to anyone who is currently in care or has been in care at any stage in their life. A complex interplay of factors leads to care‐experienced children and young people (CECYP) experiencing poorer oral health and access to dental care than their peers. A rapid review of the co‐production of health and social care research with vulnerable children and young people (CYP) was carried out to inform the development of a co‐produced research project exploring the oral health behaviours and access to dental services of CECYP. Here, 'co‐production' refers to the involvement of CYP in the planning or conduct of research with explicit roles in which they generate ideas, evidence and research outputs. Aim: To learn how to meaningfully involve vulnerable CYP in the co‐production of health and social science research. Objectives: To identify: Different approaches to facilitating the engagement of vulnerable CYP in co‐production of health and social science research; different activities carried out in such approaches, challenges to engaging vulnerable CYP in co‐production of health and social science research and ways to overcome them and areas of best practice in relation to research co‐production with vulnerable CYP. Search Strategy: A rapid review of peer‐reviewed articles was conducted in six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, SocINDEX, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science) and grey literature to identify studies that engaged vulnerable CYP in co‐approaches to health and social research. Main Results: Of 1394 documents identified in the search, 40 were included and analysed. A number of different approaches to co‐production were used in the studies. The CYP was involved in a range of activities, chiefly the development of data collection tools, data collection and dissemination. Individual challenges for CYP and researchers, practical and institutional factors and ethical considerations impacted the success of co‐production. Discussion and Conclusion: Co‐production of health and social science with vulnerable CYP presents challenges to researchers and CYP calling for all to demonstrate reflexivity and awareness of biases, strengths and limitations. Used appropriately and well, co‐production offers benefits to researchers and CYP and can contribute to research that reflects the needs of vulnerable CYP. Adherence to the key principles of inclusion, safeguarding, respect and well‐being facilitates this approach. Patient and Public Contribution: Members of our patient and public involvement and stakeholder groups contributed to the interpretation of the review findings. This manuscript was written together with a young care leaver, Skye Boswell, who is one of the authors. She contributed to the preparation of the manuscript, reviewing the findings and their interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Services are more likely to attract and retain youth if they are co-designed. • Services are likely to be more engaging for youth if they are personalised. • Practitioners working with youth need to be caring, open, attentive and genuine. • The service system needs to make it easy for youth to engage with services they need. • Parents/carers and peers can support young people's engagement in services. Addressing youth violence is a public health priority given its prevalence, harms and costs to society. Services designed to prevent or reduce youth violence exist. However, their effectiveness depends on youth engaging with them. To our knowledge, there is no overview of the evidence on how to support this process. This article therefore aims to identify key messages from the scientific literature about how services can best engage youth at risk of involvement in violence. We undertook a rapid review of the evidence on youth engagement in services, prioritising English language studies published from 2010- which included youth aged 10–14 years and were conducted in high-income countries. Key messages for practice relate to 12 themes: co-designing services with youth; personalising provision to youth needs and preferences; recruiting staff with suitable experience and qualities; developing positive practitioner-participant relationships; nurturing an enabling service system; creating an inviting service environment; designing interesting activities and service content; encouraging peer engagement; securing parent/carer support; exploring opportunities for service integration; proactively including marginalised groups; and exploiting digital opportunities. While we could identify key messages from the literature, more prospective empirical research is needed to test the effectiveness of strategies in isolation and combination. This includes exploring what works for whom and in what circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]