Assessing the impact of university students' involvement in the first year of Nurture-U: a national student wellbeing research project.
Assessing the impact of university students' involvement in the first year of Nurture-U: a national student wellbeing research project.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s40900-023-00478-7
复制
发表时间：
2023-10-17
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
学生的幸福感水平低于一般同龄人群。整个大学的心理健康方法受到鼓励，它必须适用于所有背景和经历的个人。在研究和设计这些解决方案时，学生的投入是至关重要的。Nurture-U是一个全国性的大型研究项目，探索更好的方法来支持学生的福祉，并有一个学生咨询小组（SAG）参与项目决策。随着项目第一年的完成，我们现在对SAG的流程和有效性进行了严格的审查，以及该项目与学生的互动和合作情况。通过对小组会议的内容分析和使用患者参与质量指导工具收集顾问和研究人员的反馈，评估SAG对项目、学生顾问和研究人员的影响。在Nurture-U项目的第一年，142名学生完成了不同的任务。SAG参与了项目的品牌和营销，以及干预措施和工具的开发和共同设计。他们报告了积极的经历，参与增强了信心。他们觉得自己受到重视，但报告称，他们并不总是知道自己的意见是否在最终决策中得到了落实。他们还推荐了提供反馈的不同方法。研究人员发现，学生的投入有利于交流不同一代的观点，增加研究的相关性，但也建议改善研究团队和学生群体之间的沟通。对于SAG在这一大规模研究项目中所扮演的公共顾问角色的批判性反思，对于突出哪些工作做得很好以及需要改进的地方非常重要。随着项目的展开，我们的目标是调整学生投入的方法，增加决策过程的透明度，从而在项目中增加学生主导的决策。大学生的健康面临着许多挑战，包括学业压力、频繁的地点变化、支持系统的距离以及新的社会和文化环境。Nurture-U研究项目正在研究大学如何支持学生的福祉。它得到了一个学生咨询小组（SAG）的支持，该小组正在帮助我们设计这项研究。本文的目的是反思在为期4年的培育- u项目的第一年，SAG的投入。在Nurture-U项目的第一年，142名学生完成了不同的任务，包括营销和设计治疗应用程序。SAG描述了一种被重视的感觉，获得自信和对心理健康和研究的理解。研究人员认为SAG改善了nurt - u，使其与学生更相关。然而，所有人都担心最终的决定是由研究人员主导的，而不是由学生主导的。此外，演员缺乏多样性，大多数演员都是女性。SAG建议研究人员和学生以不同的方式合作。这包括为学生顾问提供不同的方式来表达他们的意见，例如在较小的或面对面的小组中，或在在线论坛上。此外，研究人员可以通过通讯或视频与SAG进行不同的接触，以更清楚地了解如何做出最终决定。这种正式的反思活动有助于Nurture-U团队考虑如何在项目的其余部分改善与SAG的合作，我们希望这将确保学生的声音指导项目如何展开。
Students experience lower levels of wellbeing than the general, age-matched population. A whole-university approach to mental health is encouraged, which must work for individuals from all backgrounds and experiences. Student input is vital in researching and designing these solutions. Nurture-U is a national, large-scale research project exploring better ways to support student wellbeing, with a Student Advisory Group (SAG) that feeds into project decision making. With the first year of the project now completed, we now critically review the processes and effectiveness of the SAG and how well the project is engaging and working with students. Assessment of the SAG’s impact on the project, the student advisors, and the researchers was undertaken through a content analysis of team meetings and collection of advisor and researcher feedback using the Patient Engagement Quality Guidance Tool. 142 students worked on different tasks in the first year of the Nurture-U project. The SAG was involved in the project branding and marketing, and in the development and co-design of interventions and tools. They reported a positive experience, with involvement boosting confidence. They felt valued but reported not always knowing whether their input was implemented in final decisions. They also recommended different methods of providing feedback. Researchers found student input beneficial to communicate the viewpoint of a different generation and increase the relevance of the study, but also suggested improvements for communication between the research team and the student group. This critical reflection of the SAG’s public advisor role in this large-scale research project was important in highlighting what worked well and areas to improve. As the project unfolds, we aim to adapt our methods of student input, increase the transparency of decision-making processes, and in turn increase student-led decision making within the project. University students face many challenges to their wellbeing, including academic stress, frequent changes of location, distancing of support systems, and new social and cultural surroundings. The Nurture-U research project is looking at how universities can support student wellbeing. It is supported by a Student Advisory Group (SAG) that is helping us design the research. The aim of this paper is to reflect on the input of the SAG in the first year of the 4-year Nurture-U project. 142 students worked on different tasks in the first year of the Nurture-U project, including marketing and designing therapeutic apps. The SAG described feeling valued, gaining confidence and an understanding of mental health and research. Researchers felt the SAG improved Nurture-U, making it more relevant to students. However, all were concerned that final decisions were researcher-led, not student-led. There was also a lack of diversity, with most of the SAG being female. The SAG advised different ways for researchers and students to work together. This included having different ways for student advisors to voice their opinions, for example in smaller or face-to-face groups, or on online boards. Also, researchers could engage with the SAG differently, through newsletters or videos, to make it clearer how final decisions are made. This formal reflection activity has helped the Nurture-U team consider ways to improve working with the SAG for the rest of the project, which we hope will ensure that student voices guide how the project unfolds.