1
|
Tinner L. Reflections on the benefits and challenges of using co-produced artistic workshops to engage with young people in community settings. RESEARCH INVOLVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT 2024; 10:51. [PMID: 38831355 PMCID: PMC11149207 DOI: 10.1186/s40900-024-00575-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2023] [Accepted: 04/18/2024] [Indexed: 06/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite increased focus on adolescence, young people's voices are often undervalued and underrepresented in health inequalities research and policy. Through exploring young people's priorities for their health and their community, we may begin to understand how public health interventions and policies can be more effective and equitable. Engaging with youth using art enables empowerment and self-expression on these complex topics. METHODS Creative workshops, co-produced with a young artist, were delivered at three youth centres to participants aged 11-18 years (n = 30) in disadvantaged areas of Bristol, UK. Participants engaged in art and were guided by a semi-structured topic guide through focus group discussion. Thematic analysis, supported by the young artist, was used to distil key policy priorities for young people to be delivered to the local authority. RESULTS The young people identified a list of key priorities. These were: (1) mental health, (2) feeling 'forgotten' as an age group and having safe city spaces to socialise, (3) the need for greater support for their education and career aspirations. I provide a brief summary of these priorities, but the focus of this article is on the critical reflections on this innovative way of engaging with young people about local policy. I provide key learning points for researchers looking to do creative public health work in community settings and involve marginalised young people. CONCLUSIONS Art is a promising way of engaging with young people in community settings and elevating marginalised voices. Co-producing with a local young artist enriched the project and partially alleviated power imbalances. This approach has potential for involving different groups within local policymaking and priority setting around health inequalities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura Tinner
- Bristol Medical School, Population Health Sciences, Canygne Hall, Bristol, BS8 2BN, UK.
- Population Health Sciences. Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PN, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kemper S, de Vries M, de Weger E, Bongers M, Kupper F, Timen A. The public's considerations about implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions to manage a novel COVID-19 epidemic. Heliyon 2024; 10:e30390. [PMID: 38737250 PMCID: PMC11088335 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e30390] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/04/2024] [Revised: 04/24/2024] [Accepted: 04/25/2024] [Indexed: 05/14/2024] Open
Abstract
In the future, new variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus might emerge and cause outbreaks. If this occurs, the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) can be reconsidered. Consideration of the potential benefits and harms of implementing NPIs, and ultimately deciding about implementing NPIs, is currently mainly executed by experts and governments. However, general literature on public engagement suggests that integrating public perspectives into decision-making can enhance the quality of decisions and foster greater public understanding of them. In this study, a deliberative mini-public was conducted to integrate this public perspective. The aim was to elicit public considerations regarding non-pharmaceutical interventions by asking a diverse group of citizens to participate as decision-makers and convene, learn and deliberate about implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions during a hypothetical outbreak of a new SARS-CoV-2 variant. Participants emphasized the importance of early implementation during the outbreak, to prevent exceeding healthcare capacity, long-term mental health issues, educational deficits, and bankruptcies. Additionally, participants stressed taking public support into account, and shared ideas on maintaining support. Furthermore, participants wanted to give citizens personal responsibility and freedom in making their own assessment regarding adherence to interventions and how much risk of infection they would be willing to accept. Participants also expressed the need for the government to adopt a learning attitude towards improvements in pandemic response, and to generate more focus on long-term strategies. The deliberative mini-public, revealed public considerations that reflected public values and needs. These considerations might be helpful in better aligning epidemic management policies with public perspectives. Regarding the deliberative mini-public, uncertainties remain about the design and impact on a bigger scale.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sophie Kemper
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marion de Vries
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Esther de Weger
- Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marloes Bongers
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
| | - Frank Kupper
- Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Aura Timen
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, the Netherlands
- Athena Institute, Faculty of Science, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Middleton A, Adams A, Aidid H, Atutornu J, Boraschi D, Borra J, Bircan T, Burch C, Costa A, Dickinson A, Enticknap A, Galloway C, Gale F, Garlick E, Haydon E, Henriques S, Mitchell M, Milne R, Monaghan J, Morley KI, Muella Santos M, Olivares Boldu L, Olumogba F, Orviss K, Parry V, Patch C, Robarts L, Shingles S, Smidt C, Tomlin B, Parkinson S. Public engagement with genomics. Wellcome Open Res 2023; 8:310. [PMID: 37928209 PMCID: PMC10624956 DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.19473.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/13/2023] [Indexed: 11/07/2023] Open
Abstract
As detailed in its flagship report, Genome UK, the UK government recognises the vital role that broad public engagement across whole populations plays in the field of genomics. However, there is limited evidence about how to do this at scale. Most public audiences do not feel actively connected to science, are oftenunsure of the relevance to their lives and rarely talk to their family and friends about; we term this dis-connection a 'disengaged public audience'. We use a narrative review to explore: (i) UK attitudes towards genetics and genomics and what may influence reluctance to engage with these topics; (ii) innovative public engagement approaches that have been used to bring diverse public audiences into conversations about the technology. Whilst we have found some novel engagement methods that have used participatory arts, film, social media and deliberative methods, there is no clear agreement on best practice. We did not find a consistently used, evidence-based strategy for delivering public engagement about genomics across diverse and broad populations, nor a specific method that is known to encourage engagement from groups that have historically felt (in terms of perception) and been (in reality) excluded from genomic research. We argue there is a need for well-defined, tailor-made engagement strategies that clearly articulate the audience, the purpose and the proposed impact of the engagement intervention. This needs to be coupled with robust evaluation frameworks to build the evidence-base for population-level engagement strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Middleton
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | | | - Hugbaad Aidid
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | - Jerome Atutornu
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
- School of Health and Sport Sciences, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, England, UK
| | - Daniela Boraschi
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | | | - Tuba Bircan
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | - Claudette Burch
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | | | | | | | - Catherine Galloway
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | | | - Emma Garlick
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
| | - Em Haydon
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
| | - Sasha Henriques
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
- Clinical Genetics Department, Guy's and St Thomas' Hospital, London, England, UK
| | - Marion Mitchell
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | - Richard Milne
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
- Kavli Centre for Ethics, Science and the Public, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, England, UK
| | | | - Katherine I Morley
- RAND Europe, Cambridge, England, UK
- Melbourne School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | | | | | | | | | - Vivienne Parry
- Genomics England, Queen Mary University of London, London, England, UK
| | | | | | - Sam Shingles
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
| | - Cindy Smidt
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
| | - Ben Tomlin
- Wellcome Connecting Science, Hinxton, England, UK
| | | |
Collapse
|