INSIGHT: A co-produced qualitative exploration of young women’s perspectives on psychological distress in their population and priority actions for responding
Authors: Ola Demkowicz, Rebecca Jefferson, Lucy Foulkes, Pratyasha Nanda, Joanna Lam
.jpg)
Girls and women are at greater risk of depressive and anxious symptoms and disorder, and evidence suggests adolescent girls have recently been experiencing even greater rates. We explored young women’s perspectives of low mood and anxiety in their population, to inform ongoing responses. We adopted a co-produced qualitative research design, led by an interdisciplinary team.
We met young women to inform the initial design and, once funded, hired two young women as researchers to co-produce the project. We engaged 32 diverse 16-18-year-old young women across England in small online focus groups jointly facilitated by a research associate and young researcher. We worked with young researchers to analyse data using reflexive thematic analysis. Issues raised by participants included current mental health discourses, expectations of how girls and women ‘should’ look and behave, educational pressures, social media, and difficulties with peers. Participants highlighted a range of approaches and system changes that could be implemented to challenge such issues.
The project offers direction for ongoing research examining rates of low mood and distress among young women in England and internationally, and has important implications for policymakers and practitioners working across a range of industries including education, media, and technology.
Applying open research practices
- Co-production: First, in bid development we held youth advisory discussions with seven young women from varied backgrounds, compensated via NIHR Research Design Service North West’s public involvement fund. Discussions highlighted that young women considered the project important, and informed the issues we raised in focus groups, recruitment strategies for engaging diverse participants, and use of online focus groups including strategies for participant safety and comfort. Second, once funded, we hired two young researchers via Common Room, an organisation specialising in youth voice in research and policy. Young researchers were embedded in decision-making across each stage, including design of recruitment materials and data generation procedures/materials, co-leading focus groups, co-analysing data, interpreting findings, and, currently, the development of dissemination materials.
- Study pre-registration: We pre-registered the study with the Research Registry and published a detailed protocol and all recruitment/data generation materials via the OSF once ethical approval was granted.
- Open ‘code’: Given the sensitivity of discussions, the project team decided in early stages not to make data publicly available. However, in developing articles we are working toward transparency in analysis, specifically sharing codes underpinning themes and volume of data attached to codes.
Overcoming challenges
- Co-production: Contractual issues delayed hiring young researchers, requiring timeline negotiations. In later stages, one young researcher was unable to continue due to wider circumstances; we remained in touch with updates and on key decisions/dissemination. The project was short-term, so we had not planned funds for young researchers’ involvement in later dissemination/planning, requiring securing further funds.
- Pre-registration: We had not budgeted for the Research Registry (required registry by funder) so needed to redistribute funds. As the project developed over time we were unsure when the protocol should and should not be formally amended; we sought advice from our funder and colleagues.
Benefits of using these open research practices
- Co-production: Young researchers co-designing procedures/materials aided the quality of our participant engagement, and their co-leading focus groups aided trust and relatability. Young researchers’ reflections have supported development of nuanced findings capturing what ‘being a young woman’ today means for mental health, and highlighted the real world implications of findings beyond our usual research domains. We have also found that including their reflections in dissemination supports audience connection with the work.
- Study pre-registration and open code supports trust and transparency as we share findings and allows others to adapt procedures/materials for further work (already happening in at least one project).
Overall benefit: Open science principles can align with and even support the organic and cyclical nature of qualitative research, enhancing methodological rigour and deepening the meaning and reach of findings.
Top tip
To engage meaningfully in open research practices – and especially co-production – we need to work in our teams to create open, collaborative spaces and to be open to new ways of doing things.