RESUMEN
Dogru et al. recent study reported developing text messages that attempted to capture each of 93 behavior change techniques (BCTs) in a standardized taxonomy. They found that a panel of experts identified the majority of the messages developed as having good fidelity to the intended BCTs. While this work has clear merit, we do not believe it accurately reflects the large body of existing research in this area. A process of producing text messages to address BCTs that yielded high fidelity has previously been reported. Furthermore, this work showed that messages developed for one behavior can be modified to address another behavior with similarly good fidelity. Importantly, these messages have been shown to successfully change target constructs in an experimental study and are being used in a randomized trial that has recently completed recruitment of over 1000 people with Type 2 diabetes.
Dogru et al. developed a list of text messages to deliver behavior change techniques (BCTs). BCTs are methods for changing behavior and a standardized taxonomy has described 93 such BCTs. The authors found that of 93 messages addressing these 93 BCTs, 66 of the messages were agreed by experts to deliver the intended BCT. According to the authors, the next step would be to analyze the effectiveness of the messages. This work has clear merit, however, the suggested process does not accurately represent the work that has already been done in this area. A body of work has developed text messages to target adherence to medication in people with Type 2 diabetes. These messages were rated by experts as delivering the intended BCTs and were rated as acceptable by people with Type 2 diabetes. Furthermore, these messages have been successfully modified to address other behaviors such as diet and physical activity with experts rating these messages as delivering the intended BCTs. These messages have been found to change constructs such as intention when delivered in an experimental study and are now being used in a randomized controlled trial that has completed recruitment of over 1000 people with Type 2 diabetes.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: International organisations have called to increase young people's involvement in healthcare and health policy development. We currently lack effective methods for facilitating meaningful engagement by young people in health-related decision-making. The purpose of this scoping review is to identify deliberative priority setting methods and explore the effectiveness of these in engaging young people in healthcare and health policy decision-making. METHODS: Seven databases were searched systematically, using MeSH and free text terms, for articles published in English before July 2021 that described the use of deliberative priority setting methods for health decision-making with young people. All titles, abstracts and full-text papers were screened by a team of six independent reviewers between them. Data extraction followed the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidelines. The results are presented as a narrative synthesis, structured around four components for evaluating deliberative processes: 1) representation and inclusion of diverse participants, 2) the way the process is run including levels and timing of participant engagement, 3) the quality of the information provided to participants and 4) resulting outcomes and decisions. FINDINGS: The search yielded 9 reviews and 21 studies. The more engaging deliberative priority setting tools involved young people-led committees, mixed methods for identifying and prioritising issues and digital data collection and communication tools. Long-term and frequent contact with young people to build trust underpinned the success of some of the tools, as did offering incentives for taking part and skills development using creative methods. The review also suggests that successful priority setting processes with young people involve consideration of power dynamics, since young people's decisions are likely to be made together with family members, health professionals and academics. DISCUSSION: Young people's engagement in decision-making about their health is best achieved through investing time in building strong relationships and ensuring young people are appropriately rewarded for their time and contribution. If young people are to be instrumental in improving their health and architects of their own futures, decision-making processes need to respect young people's autonomy and agency. Our review suggests that methods of power-sharing with young people do exist but that they have yet to be adopted by organisations and global institutions setting global health policy.
