Explore the vast range of titles available.

Objectives. To use a systematic review methodology to describe the state of the youth participatory action research (YPAR) literature and synthesize findings about the youth outcomes reported in these studies. Methods. We screened and coded studies using a process consistent with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Of the 3,724 articles found in the database search, 67 reports of 63 distinct studies were included in the final sample. These reports were coded for reports of YPAR principles and project characteristics, study methods, and reported youth outcomes. Results. The YPAR literature comprises predominantly qualitative studies, with only two randomized trials. The most common outcomes associated with participation in YPAR were those related to agency and leadership (75.0%), followed by academic or career (55.8%), social (36.5%), interpersonal (34.6%), and cognitive (23.1%) outcomes. Conclusions. This systematic review provides emerging evidence of the skills and competencies youth may develop through YPAR and offers methodological recommendations for future research that can provide greater evidence of causality.

Background Better use of research evidence (one form of “knowledge”) in health systems requires partnerships between researchers and those who contend with the real-world needs and constraints of health systems. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) and integrated knowledge translation (IKT) are research approaches that emphasize the importance of creating partnerships between researchers and the people for whom the research is ultimately meant to be of use (“knowledge users”). There exist poor understandings of the ways in which these approaches converge and diverge. Better understanding of the similarities and differences between CBPR and IKT will enable researchers to use these approaches appropriately and to leverage best practices and knowledge from each. The co-creation of knowledge conveys promise of significant social impacts, and further understandings of how to engage and involve knowledge users in research are needed. Main text We examine the histories and traditions of CBPR and IKT, as well as their points of convergence and divergence. We critically evaluate the ways in which both have the potential to contribute to the development and integration of knowledge in health systems. As distinct research traditions, the underlying drivers and rationale for CBPR and IKT have similarities and differences across the areas of motivation, social location, and ethics; nevertheless, the practices of CBPR and IKT converge upon a common aim: the co-creation of knowledge that is the result of knowledge user and researcher expertise. We argue that while CBPR and IKT both have the potential to contribute evidence to implementation science and practices for collaborative research, clarity for the purpose of the research—social change or application—is a critical feature in the selection of an appropriate collaborative approach to build knowledge. Conclusion CBPR and IKT bring distinct strengths to a common aim: to foster democratic processes in the co-creation of knowledge. As research approaches, they create opportunities to challenge assumptions about for whom, how, and what is defined as knowledge, and to develop and integrate research findings into health systems. When used appropriately, CBPR and IKT both have the potential to contribute to and advance implementation science about the conduct of collaborative health systems research.

This diverse collection of essays and testimonies challenges critical orthodoxies about the twenty-first century boom in immersive theatre and performance. A culturally and institutionally eclectic range of producers and critics comprehensively reconsider the term 'immersive' and the practices it has been used to describe. Applying ecological, phenomenological and political ideas to both renowned and lesser-known performances, contributing scholars and artists offers fresh ideas on the ethics and practicalities of participatory performance. These ideas interrogate claims that have frequently been made by producers and by critics that participatory performance extends engagement. These claims are interrogated across nine dimensions of engagement: bodily, technological, spatial, temporal, spiritual, performative, pedagogical, textual, social. Enquiry is focussed along the following seams of analysis: the participant as co-designer; the challenges facing the facilitator of immersive/participatory performance; the challenges facing the critic of immersive/participatory performance; how and why immersion troubles boundaries between the material and the magical.

Context: Co-creation—collaborative knowledge generation by academics working alongside other stakeholders—reflects a \"Mode 2\" relationship (knowledge production rather than knowledge translation) between universities and society. Co-creation is widely believed to increase research impact. Methods: We undertook a narrative review of different models of co-creation relevant to community-based health services. We contrasted their diverse disciplinary roots and highlighted their common philosophical assumptions, principles of success, and explanations for failures. We applied these to an empirical case study of a community-based research-service partnership led by the Centre of Research Excellence in Quality and Safety in Integrated Primary-Secondary Care at the University of Queensland, Australia. Findings: Co-creation emerged independently in several fields, including business studies (\"value co-creation\"), design science (\"experience-based co-design\"), computer science (\"technology co-design\"), and community development (\"participatory research\"). These diverse models share some common features, which were also evident in the case study. Key success principles included (1) a systems perspective (assuming emergence, local adaptation, and nonlinearity); (2) the framing of research as a creative enterprise with human experience at its core; and (3) an emphasis on process (the framing of the program, the nature of relationships, and governance and facilitation arrangements, especially the style of leadership and how conflict is managed). In both the literature review and the case study, co-creation \"failures\" could often be tracked back to abandoning (or never adopting) these principles. All co-creation models made strong claims for significant and sustainable societal impacts as a result of the adaptive and developmental research process; these were illustrated in the case study. Conclusions: Co-creation models have high potential for societal impact but depend critically on key success principles. To capture the nonlinear chains of causation in the co-creation pathway, impact metrics must reflect the dynamic nature and complex interdependencies of health research systems and address processes as well as outcomes.

Perinatal depression and anxiety are significant public health concerns, affecting up to 1 in 5 women globally, with disproportionate burden carried by women in regional, rural, and remote communities where structural and social inequities amplify vulnerability. Access to perinatal mental health support in these settings is severely constrained by geographical isolation, workforce shortages, financial barriers, and a lack of culturally safe services. Prevention is recognized as critical to reducing this burden, with evidence suggesting that effective preventive approaches can reduce population-level illness by up to 40% and alleviate downstream demand on overstretched services. Digital mental health interventions hold promise for improving access to support, yet few are co-designed with underserved perinatal populations. This study aimed to identify the mental health needs of perinatal women in regional, rural, and remote communities and to co-design a framework for a preventive social media-based intervention informed by platform-specific affordances and constraints, using Northern Queensland, Australia, as an exemplar. Using a participatory co-design approach, 26 perinatal women (21 postnatal and 5 antenatal) and 8 mental health care professionals from regional, rural, and remote Northern Queensland participated in focus groups or interviews, supplemented by ongoing consultation with a community advisory group comprising lived experience representatives, clinicians, and local community leaders. Qualitative data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify core community mental health needs. Identified needs were then examined through a needs-affordances framework to determine how specific platform features could address, enable, or constrain those needs in the context of a preventive intervention. Five core mental health needs were identified: (1) social connection and support; (2) personalized and respectful health care; (3) information that empowers; (4) place-based and culturally safe support; and (5) accessible, low-burden digital formats. Participants viewed social media as a potentially useful platform for fostering peer connection, normalizing perinatal experiences, and providing timely psychoeducation. However, both mothers and professionals expressed concerns about misinformation, harmful social comparison, and privacy risks that must be proactively addressed in program design. These insights were synthesized into a set of prototype design guidelines specifying recommended content, features, tone, and delivery formats to inform subsequent intervention development. This study provides a place-based, co-designed needs-affordances framework to guide the development of a preventive social media-based intervention for perinatal mental health support in regional, rural, and remote communities. The findings demonstrate that social media is an acceptable and promising platform for preventive perinatal mental health support in these settings, provided that design is driven by community need, platform affordances are systematically analyzed, and known risks are explicitly mitigated. These findings address a significant gap in the literature and offer a replicable methodological approach for co-designing contextually relevant digital mental health interventions with underserved populations.