Brown, Jennie and Bogosian, Angeliki
(2024).
Gaining Consensus on Emotional Wellbeing Themes and Preferences for Digital Intervention Type and Content To Support the Mental Health of Young People With Long-Term Health Conditions: A Delphi Study, 2022.
[Data Collection]. Colchester, Essex:
UK Data Service.
10.5255/UKDA-SN-857049
Data description (abstract)
Background: Young people (YP) with long-term conditions (LTCs) are at greater risk of psychological distress than those without LTCs. Despite this, there is a scarcity of quality digital interventions designed to help improve mental well-being in this population The aim of this study was to determine what YP, parents and health professionals preferred for future interventions.
Methods: 26 YP with asthma, diabetes and/or epilepsy (the 3 most common LTCs in YP), 23 parents of YP with LTCs and 10 health professionals mainly in paediatric specialisms (total n= 59) took part in an online Delphi study to gain consensus (set at 75% agreement) on 4 questions across 3 rounds. Participants ordered psychological themes that may be experienced by YP with LTCs by importance and ranked digital intervention types and delivery modes by importance or usefulness. The most common results were reported if no consensus was reached by round 3.
Results: Participants preferred a mobile phone app (73% agreement) and a mixture of one-on-one and group support for an intervention (75% agreement). The two highest ranked psychological themes were anxiety (44%) and wanting to appear normal (38%), and the top intervention type was ‘general counselling’ (54% agreement).
Conclusion: There was a clear desire for an app to help with the psychological aspects of living with LTCs and for a combination of one-to-one and group intervention elements. Anxiety and wanting to appear ‘normal’ might be two closely linked psychological challenges that could be addressed by a single intervention.
Implications: The results will be important to consider for a future intervention, although further consultation will be needed for app development.
Patient or Public Contribution: 2 YP with a LTC provided feedback on the study protocol including the aims and procedures of the project. Another 6 YP with LTCs were consulted on an early draft of the study questionnaire (the 4 questions) which was subsequently revised. Once the project began, a PPI group consisting of two young people with LTCs and one parent of a YP with a LTC gave feedback on the research process, lay report of the results and dissemination plan.
| Data creators: |
|
| Sponsors: |
Economic and Social Research Council, Nurture Network (eNurture)
|
| Topic classification: |
Health
Psychology
|
| Keywords: |
PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING, YOUNG ADULTS, CHRONIC ILLNESS, PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH, MENTAL HEALTH, EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCES
|
| Project title: |
Gaining consensus on emotional wellbeing themes and preferences for digital intervention type and content to support the mental health of young people with long-term health conditions: a Delphi study
|
| Grant holders: |
Dr Angeliki Bogosian
|
| Project dates: |
| From | To |
|---|
| 3 August 2020 | 22 July 2022 |
|
| Date published: |
19 Mar 2024 09:55
|
| Last modified: |
19 Mar 2024 09:56
|
| Collection period: |
| Date from: | Date to: |
|---|
| 1 April 2022 | 1 July 2022 |
|
| Country: |
United Kingdom |
| Data collection method: |
A three-round electronic modified Delphi (eDelphi) study was used to gain consensus across all participants. A Delphi study refers to a process where participants are asked about an issue and the results of each round are reported to participants before the next round commences, until a consensus is met by all participants. Individuals meeting the following eligibility criteria were included in the study:
1) Young people aged 10 to 18 years old with one or more of the LTCs asthma, diabetes and epilepsy.
2) Parents or guardians of young people aged 11 to 18 years old with one or more of the LTCs asthma, diabetes and epilepsy
3) Professionals working with young people aged 11 to 18 years old with LTCs from the following fields: healthcare professionals (such as nurses, doctors and clinical psychologists), teachers and social workers Young people and parents/guardians were recruited via a newsletter, an online advert and an online public advisory board of eNurture, potentially reaching hundreds of young people and their families. To increase participation, we also used online adverts in school newsletters for two secondary schools in the Midlands, UK. These schools were independent (fee paying) and were part of the same network of schools. Professionals were recruited through workplaces including the secondary schools above (e.g., for school nurses and teachers) and existing contacts from within the research team, using snowball sampling. |
| Observation unit: |
Individual |
| Kind of data: |
Numeric, Text |
| Type of data: |
Other surveys |
| Resource language: |
English |
|
| Data sourcing, processing and preparation: |
The eDelphi questionnaire consisted of four questions designed to assess participant preferences for the focus, tools and content of a future intervention to improve mental wellbeing (see appendix 1 for the round 1 questions). The online survey software, Qualtrics (Qualtrics.com), was used to host the questionnaire.
This project followed an iterative process aiming to gain consensus and was completed over two months, between 21st April 2022 and 21st June 2022.
In round one, participants were sent a link to the eDelphi questionnaire via email with instructions to complete the questions within 2 weeks and to contact the research team with any problems or questions. Participants were sent reminders after the first week if they had not completed the questionnaire.
Within one week after the first round had closed, the data was analysed and a modified version of the round 2 questionnaire was created. A brief summary of the results was sent to the participants as part of the round 2 questionnaire, which again was open for 2 weeks with a reminder sent halfway. Round 3 (the final round) followed the same procedure, after which the young people and parents were offered vouchers for taking part.
Data from the first round was analysed by calculating the percentage of participants who had rated each item as first, second, third, fourth etc for questions which involved ranking items by importance. To select the items for the second round, we kept items from round 1 where at least 10% of participants ranked them as either first, second or third most important and we removed those not meeting criteria. New items were added following brief thematic analysis of suggestions from participants within the free text boxes (Durand et al., 2019). Any questions meeting consensus were removed for the next round – this meant at least 75% of participants had selected an item as the most important or useful (ranked first in the list).
A similar analysis was carried out on the round two data. However, to create lists of items to rank for the third round, the criteria was stricter: we only kept the items that more than 10% of participants had ranked as most important (first in the list) and removed the rest. There were no further (new) items added. Any questions meeting consensus were removed for the next round.
The final round 3 data was analysed by calculating percentages of participants selecting items as first, second, third etc. Where a question had still not reached consensus for this round, the results were simply reported by percentages of participants choosing each item as most important. A series of post-hoc chi squared analyses were also conducted to see if percentages of participants choosing each item as most important differed by LTC and participant type.
|
| Rights owners: |
|
| Contact: |
|
| Notes on access: |
The Data Collection is available for download to users registered with the UK Data Service.
|
| Publisher: |
UK Data Service
|
| Last modified: |
19 Mar 2024 09:56
|
|
Available Files
Data
Documentation
Read me
Edit item (login required)
 |
Edit Item |
