Involvement of Indigenous young people in the design and evaluation of digital mental health interventions: a scoping review protocol

Abstract

Background Indigenous young people worldwide are at greater risk of developing mental health concerns due to ongoing inequity and disadvantage. Digital mental health (dMH) interventions are identified as a potential approach to improving access to mental health treatment for Indigenous youth. Although involvement in the development and evaluation of dMH resources is widely recommended, there is limited evidence to guide engagement of Indigenous young people in these processes. This scoping review aims to examine the methods used to involve Indigenous young people in the development or evaluation of dMH interventions. Methods Articles published in English, involving Indigenous young people (aged 10–24 years) in the development or evaluation of dMH interventions, originating from Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA will be eligible for inclusion. PubMed, Scopus and EBSCOhost databases (Academic Search Premiere, Computer and Applied Science complete, CINAHL, MEDLINE, APA PsychArticles, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences collection, APA PsychInfo) will be searched to identify eligible articles (from January 1990 onwards). Infomit and Google Scholar (limited to 200 results) will be searched for grey literature. Two reviewers will independently screen citations, abstracts and full-text articles. Study methods, methodologies, dMH intervention details, participant information and engagement, and dissemination methods will be extracted, analysed (utilising content analysis), and qualitatively assessed for alignment with best practice ethical guidelines for undertaking Indigenous health research. A narrative summary of findings will be presented. Reporting will follow the Consolidated Criteria for Strengthening Reporting of Health Research involving Indigenous peoples (CONSIDER) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Discussion To date, there are no reviews which analyse engagement of Indigenous young people in the development and evaluation of dMH interventions. This review will appraise alignment of current practice with best practice guidelines to inform future research. It will highlight appropriate methods for the engagement of young people in study processes, providing guidance for health practitioners, policy makers, and researchers working in the field of Indigenous youth and dMH. Systematic review registration Open Science Framework (osf.io/2nkc6).

Involvement of Indigenous young people in the design and evaluation of digital mental health interventions: A scoping review of best practice principles

“…The study protocol for this scoping review has been published previously (49). It follows guidelines proposed by Arksey and O'Malley (50) and the subsequent modifications proposed by Levac et al (51) and Peters et al (52) and involves a six-stage process: 1) identifying research question; 2) identifying relevant studies; 3) study selection and data extraction, with methods refined using an iterative process throughout (51); 4) data charting; 5) collating, summarising and reporting results.…”

Codesign of a digital health tool for suicide prevention: protocol for a scoping review

“…The proliferation of digital technology platforms such as mental health applications and websites exceed 10 000 particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic 3–7. The data are limited, however, on whether service users engage with the platforms or were involved as co-collaborators 8–12. To explore the disconnect between online suicide prevention tools and engagement by experts by experience this study offers a codesign process 13.…”

“…[3][4][5][6][7] The data are limited, however, on whether service users engage with the platforms or were involved as co-collaborators. [8][9][10][11][12] To explore the disconnect between online suicide prevention tools and engagement by experts by experience this study offers a codesign process. 13 The first phase of the process involves all members of the research team (academics, experts by experience, public and patient involvement lead, research assistant and mental health nurse) reviewing and discussing literature at monthly meetings at the University of Bradford (face-to-face and online).…”

Prevalence and risk factors for intimate partner violence and indigenous women: A scoping review

“…The term “indigenous” can be defined to describe people who originate from a particular region with a rich diversity of cultures and knowledge, including their own dialects (Povey et al, 2021).…”