IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i7p4062-d782350.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Potential of a School-Based Online Health and Wellbeing Screening Tool: Young People’s Perspectives

Author

Listed:
  • Nicholas Woodrow

    (School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK)

  • Hannah Fairbrother

    (Health Sciences School, University of Sheffield, 3a Clarkehouse Road, Sheffield S10 2HQ, UK)

  • Katrina D’Apice

    (Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK)

  • Katie Breheny

    (Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK)

  • Patricia Albers

    (Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK)

  • Clare Mills

    (Public Health, Floor 4, Halford Wing, City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester City Council, Leicester LE1 1FZ, UK)

  • Sarah Tebbett

    (Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Bridge Park Plaza, Bridge Park Road, Thurmaston, Leicester LE4 8PQ, UK)

  • Rona Campbell

    (Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK)

  • Frank De Vocht

    (Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK)

Abstract

Despite high levels of need, many young people who experience health issues do not seek, access or receive support. Between May and November 2021, using semi-structured interviews, we explored the perspectives of 51 young people (aged 13–14) from two schools who had taken part in a novel online health and wellbeing screening programme, the Digital Health Contact (DHC). One school delivered the DHC during home-learning due to COVID-19 restrictions, whilst the other delivered it in school when restrictions were lifted. The DHC was seen as a useful approach for identifying health need and providing support, and had high levels of acceptability. Young people appreciated the online format of the DHC screening questionnaire and thought this facilitated more honest responses than a face-to-face approach might generate. Completion at home, compared to school-based completion, was perceived as more private and less time-pressured, which young people thought facilitated more honest and detailed responses. Young people’s understanding of the screening process (including professional service involvement and confidentiality) influenced engagement and responses. Overall, our findings afford important insights around young people’s perspectives of participating in screening programmes, and highlight key considerations for the development and delivery of health screening approaches in (and out of) school.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicholas Woodrow & Hannah Fairbrother & Katrina D’Apice & Katie Breheny & Patricia Albers & Clare Mills & Sarah Tebbett & Rona Campbell & Frank De Vocht, 2022. "Exploring the Potential of a School-Based Online Health and Wellbeing Screening Tool: Young People’s Perspectives," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-17, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:7:p:4062-:d:782350
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4062/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/7/4062/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Joanna K. & Howarth, Emma & Vainre, Maris & Jones, Peter B. & Humphrey, Ayla, 2017. "A scoping literature review of service-level barriers for access and engagement with mental health services for children and young people," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 164-176.
    2. Hallfors, Denise & Khatapoush, Shereen & Kadushin, Charles & Watson, Kim & Saxe, Leonard, 2000. "A comparison of paper vs computer-assisted self interview for school alcohol, tobacco, and other drug surveys," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 149-155, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vivo, Sigrid & McCoy, Sandra I. & López-Peña, Paula & Muñoz, Rodrigo & Larrieu, Monica I. & Celhay, Pablo, 2017. "How accurate is our misinformation? A randomized comparison of four survey interview methods to measure risk behavior among young adults in the Dominican Republic," Development Engineering, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 53-67.
    2. Kim, Minseop & Garcia, Antonio R. & Jung, Nahri & Barnhart, Sheila, 2020. "Rates and predictors of mental health service use among dual system youth," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    3. Glassgow, Anne Elizabeth & Gerges, Michael & Martin, Molly A. & Estrada, Isela & Issa, Zahra & Lapin, Katerine & Morell, Laura & Solis, Nitza & Van Voorhees, Benjamin & Risser, Heather J., 2018. "Integration of mental health services into an innovative health care delivery model for children with chronic conditions," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 144-151.
    4. Danice K. Eaton & Nancy D. Brener & Laura Kann & Maxine M. Denniston & Tim McManus & Tonja M. Kyle & Alice M. Roberts & Katherine H. Flint & James G. Ross, 2010. "Comparison of Paper-and-Pencil Versus Web Administration of the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS): Risk Behavior Prevalence Estimates," Evaluation Review, , vol. 34(2), pages 137-153, April.
    5. Gevaert, Koen & Keinemans, Sabrina & Roose, Rudi, 2018. "Deciding on priorities in youth care: A systematic literature review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 191-199.
    6. Sapiro, Beth, 2020. "Assessing trustworthiness: Marginalized youth and the central relational paradox in treatment," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    7. Kaitlyn M. Mazzilli & Michelle T. Bover Manderski & Cristine D. Delnevo & Mary Hrywna, 2022. "A Pilot Feasibility Study of an Online Youth Tobacco Survey Administration among High School Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-8, August.
    8. Eichstedt, Julie A. & Turcotte, Kara & Golden, Grace & Arbuthnott, Alexis E. & Chen, Samantha & Collins, Kerry A. & Mowat, Stephanie & Reid, Graham J., 2024. "Waitlist management in child and adolescent mental health care: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Giordano, Keri & LaTourette, Richard & O'Rourke, Sarah & Baker, Sadaysia & Breen, Emily, 2021. "Availability & willingness of psychologists to treat infants and young children: Data from one state," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    10. June S. L. Brown & Stephen Lisk & Ben Carter & Sharon A. M. Stevelink & Ryan Van Lieshout & Daniel Michelson, 2022. "How Can We Actually Change Help-Seeking Behaviour for Mental Health Problems among the General Public? Development of the ‘PLACES’ Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Rachel Moran & Leslie Morrison Gutman, 2021. "Mental health training to improve communication with children and adolescents: A process evaluation," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3-4), pages 415-432, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:7:p:4062-:d:782350. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.