This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.

The aim of this paper is to report our notes from the field on using movement toward goals at an aggregate level as an inference of service effectiveness. Analysis of routinely collected data from UK youth mental health services was conducted (N = 8,172, age M = 13.8, 67% female, 32% male) to explore the impact of including goal‐based outcome data in combined calculations of standardized measures based on the principles of reliable change (“measurable change”). Due to the broad nature of standardized measures, inferred validity becomes diluted in any team or service level aggregate analysis. To make inferences that are closer to the person's interpretation of their difficulties, we argue that Idiographic Patient Reported Outcome Measures (I‐PROMs) counterbalance these limitations. This is supported by our findings. The measurable change metric is the first step towards enabling national analysis of aggregated I‐PROMs. I‐PROMs, supplemented by standardized measures should be used to consider service evaluation.

Of children with mental health problems who access specialist help, 50% show reliable improvement on self-report measures at case closure and 10% reliable deterioration. To contextualise these figures it is necessary to consider rates of improvement for those in the general population. This study examined rates of reliable improvement/deterioration for children in a school sample over time. N = 9074 children (mean age 12; 52% female; 79% white) from 118 secondary schools across England provided self-report mental health (SDQ), quality of life and demographic data (age, ethnicity and free school meals (FSM) at baseline and 1 year and self-report data on access to mental health support at 1 year). Multinomial logistic regressions and classification trees were used to analyse the data. Of 2270 (25%) scoring above threshold for mental health problems at outset, 27% reliably improved and 9% reliably deteriorated at 1-year follow up. Of 6804 (75%) scoring below threshold, 4% reliably improved and 12% reliably deteriorated. Greater emotional difficulties at outset were associated with greater rates of reliable improvement for both groups (above threshold group: OR = 1.89, p < 0.001, 95% CI [1.64, 2.17], below threshold group: OR = 2.23, p < 0.001, 95% CI [1.93, 2.57]). For those above threshold, higher baseline quality of life was associated with greater likelihood of reliable improvement (OR = 1.28, p < 0.001, 95% CI [1.13, 1.46]), whilst being in receipt of FSM was associated with reduced likelihood of reliable improvement (OR = 0.68, p < 0.01, 95% CI [0.53, 0.88]). For the group below threshold, being female was associated with increased likelihood of reliable deterioration (OR = 1.20, p < 0.025, 95% CI [1.00, 1.42]), whereas being from a non-white ethnic background was associated with decreased likelihood of reliable deterioration (OR = 0.66, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.54, 0.80]). For those above threshold, almost one in three children showed reliable improvement at 1 year. The extent of emotional difficulties at outset showed the highest associations with rates of reliable improvement.

Various health settings have advocated for involving patients and members of the public (PPI) in research as a means to increase quality and relevance of the produced knowledge. However, youth PPI has been an understudied area. This protocol paper describes a new project that aims to summarize what is known about PPI with young people in mental health research. In line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement guidelines we will identify and appraise suitable articles and extract and synthesize relevant information including at least two reviewers at each stage of the process. Results will be presented in two systematic reviews that will describe (a) how youth PPI has been conducted (Review1) and (b) what impact youth PPI had on the subsequent research and on stakeholders (Review2). To our knowledge, this is the first set of reviews that uses a critical appraisal tool, which is co-developed with children and young people. Findings from this project will provide valuable insights and set out the key steps to adopting adequate PPI methods when involving children and young people in mental health research.