Key questions: research priorities for student mental health.

BACKGROUND: The high prevalence of mental distress among university students is gaining academic, policy and public attention. As the volume of research into student mental health increases, it is important to involve students to ensure that the evidence produced can translate into meaningful improvements. AIMS: For the first time, we consult UK students about their research priorities on student mental health. METHOD: This priority setting exercise involved current UK university students who were asked to submit three research questions relating to student mental health. Responses were aggregated into themes through content analysis and considered in the context of existing research. Students were involved throughout the project, including inception, design, recruitment, analysis and dissemination. RESULTS: UK university students (N = 385) submitted 991 questions, categorised into seven themes: epidemiology, causes and risk factors, academic factors and work-life balance, sense of belonging, intervention and services, mental health literacy and consequences. Across themes, respondents highlighted the importance of understanding the experience of minority groups. CONCLUSIONS: Students are interested in understanding the causes and consequences of poor mental health at university, across academic and social domains. They would like to improve staff and students' knowledge about mental health, and have access to evidence-based support. Future research should take a broad lens to evaluate interventions; considering how services are designed and delivered, and investigating institutional and behavioural barriers to accessibility, including how this varies across different groups within the student population.

Simulation training programme to improve the integrated response of teams in mental health crisis care.

Background: This report presents the findings of a simulation programme to improve the integrated response of teams working in mental health crisis (MHC) care. The programme consisted of the delivery of five interprofessional training courses that aimed to improve the core skills of teams working in MHC care. Methods: Questionnaires were conducted pre-training and post-training, measuring participants' human factors using the Human Factors SKills for Healthcare Instrument, as well as self-reported learning experience using free text questions. Results: The results found a significant change in human factors scores across all courses. Additionally, thematic analysis of the free text questions showed that participants identified improvements in communication, teamwork and clinical knowledge across all courses, with improvements in other skills in specific courses. Conclusion: Overall, the findings suggest a positive impact of the simulation programme across a range of personal and clinical skills, developing further the case for including simulation training in routine mental healthcare education programmes. Future research should consider the long-term impact of interprofessional simulation training in MHC teams to gain further insight into the efficacy of this training modality.