A qualitative evaluation of coproduction of research: 'If you do it properly, you will get turbulence'.

BACKGROUND: Patients and public members are increasingly involved across the different stages of the research process. Their involvement is particularly important in the conception and design of applied health research where it enables people with lived experience to influence the aims, content, focus and methods. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the process of coproducing a mental health-related research proposal suitable for funding through a national health research funding body. METHODS: Reflections from members of the public (n = 3) and academic researchers (n = 3) were collected through semi-structured interviews. Data were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Thematic analysis identified five overarching themes: valuing the lived experience perspective; matching ambitions to the funded research process; 'Us and them': power, relationships and trust; challenges; and benefits of coproduction. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that for successful coproduction of a research funding application, an open and trusting atmosphere, where equal relationships are established and a shared common goal agreed is essential. Although relationships with research professionals were framed by trust and mutual respect for some public advisors, others felt a sense of 'us and them'. With various tensions played out through interpersonal conflict, difficult conversations and disagreements, coproduction was not a positive experience for all stakeholders involved. Among the learning was that when collaboration of this kind is constrained by time or funding, genuine, impactful coproduction can be more challenging than is generally acknowledged.

Commentary: Considering nomenclature for autism - aligning with the language preferences of the autistic community - a commentary on Kehinde et al. (2021).

Since the implementation of 'autism' as a diagnosable condition in the 1980s, the medical model has continued to dominate how we understand autism. More recently, there has been a rise in understanding autism through the neurodiversity model and the lived experiences of autistic people themselves. However, there is often misalignment between the medical model and the preferences of the autistic community. In particular, there are misalignments around the language we use in society to discuss autism and autistic people. Language misalignments are particularly important, with language playing an important role in conveying understandings of a group within society. This article highlights these nomenclature misalignments, focussing on (1) Asperger syndrome, (2) functioning labels, (3) severity assumptions, (4) the language of disorder and (5) identity-first compared to person-first language. The article discusses the difficulties that might present in healthcare settings as a result of these misalignments.

Supporting mental health and wellbeing of university and college students: A systematic review of review-level evidence of interventions.

AIMS: The review of reviews had three aims: (i) to synthesize the available evidence on interventions to improve college and university students' mental health and wellbeing; (ii) to identify the effectiveness of interventions, and (iii) to highlight gaps in the evidence base for future study. METHODS: Electronic database searches were conducted to identify reviews in English from high-income OECD countries published between 1999 and 2020. All review-level empirical studies involving post-secondary students attending colleges of further education or universities that examined interventions to improve general mental health and wellbeing were included. Articles were critically appraised using an amended version of the AMSTAR 2 tool. Evidence from the included reviews were narratively synthesized and organised by intervention types. RESULTS: Twenty-seven reviews met the review of reviews inclusion criteria. The quality of the included reviews varied considerably. Intervention types identified included: mindfulness-based interventions, psychological interventions, psychoeducation interventions, recreation programmes, relaxation interventions, setting-based interventions, and stress management/reduction interventions. There was evidence that mindfulness-based interventions, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), and interventions delivered via technology were effective when compared to a passive control. Some evidence suggested that the effects of CBT-related interventions are sustained over time. Psychoeducation interventions do not appear to be as effective as other forms of intervention, with its effects not enduring over time. CONCLUSIONS: The review of reviews located a sizeable body of evidence on specific interventions such as mindfulness and cognitive-behavioural interventions. The evidence suggests that these interventions can effectively reduce common mental health difficulties in the higher education student body. Gaps and limitations in the reviews and the underlying body of evidence have been identified. These include a notable gap in the existing body of review-level evidence on setting-based interventions, acceptance and commitment training, and interventions for students attending colleges in UK settings.

Bridging the Gap: Exploring the Unique Transition From Home, School or College Into University.

Although previous research has shown that psychological distress increases on entering university, little is known about first-year student perspectives on the stressors in university environments, and what measures might better support student mental health and well-being during the transition period. The present research seeks to bridge this gap by exploring the unique transition period from home, school or college into university in order to identify aspects of the university experience (teaching, curriculum, support services, accommodation) that could be adapted to better support student mental health and well-being. Eight focus groups were conducted across two higher education institutions in North West England. Focus group data were thematically analyzed. Four overarching themes were identified: "Tackling multiple challenges"; "The preparatory role of schools and colleges"; "University staff and services: Feeling supported/unsupported"; and "Friendships." Although pressure to perform academically whilst fulfilling the stereotypical student life is keenly felt during the transition period, many students conceal their struggles from family and friends. Living beyond their familiar support structures often leaves students in need of compassionate humans to turn to for support or advice, especially as many keep their struggles hidden. Large-group teaching settings stifle social connection and leave students feeling lonely. Loneliness was also experienced within accommodation environments. Providing increased opportunities for connection within living and learning environments would enable young people to build and strengthen relationships with fellow students and staff. As supportive environments foster a sense of belonging and community, universities should ensure that students feel supported by staff and peers whilst they acclimatize to multiple new challenges.