MedPath

Co-Producing LGBTQ-Affirmative DBT Protocols.

Not yet recruiting
Conditions
Self-Harm
Suicidal
Emotional Dysregulation
Registration Number
NCT06966193
Lead Sponsor
King's College London
Brief Summary

Aims:

1. To co-produce new intervention parts that meet the needs of LGBTQ+ people at risk of self-harm or suicidal thoughts, with LGBTQ+ people and DBT therapists. These intervention parts will be integrated into a Dialectical Behaviour Therapy (DBT) intervention, that is provided earlier in a persons mental health care journey, than DBT is usually targeted at.

2. To assess how acceptable and feasible the co-production process was for participants, and how well it achieved co-production principles (e.g. participants feel supported, that the aims were transparent, etc).

Why is This Important? Young people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and with other minoritised gender and sexual identities (LGBTQ+) are much more likely to self-harm and experience suicidal thoughts than cisgender-heterosexual (non-LGBTQ+) people. They also experience barriers when accessing mental health support. Some of these barriers come from a lack of support tailored towards their needs as an LGBTQ+ person. This often means that things get worse before they access the right support, and so are often seen in higher-intensity interventions (tier 4 or tertiary care), like DBT.

What The Investigators Plan to Do:

The investigators plan to hold some focus groups with three different groups of people to co-produce the new intervention parts. The three groups include:

1. A group of LGBTQ+ young people (13-21 years old) who have completed a at full DBT programme recently.

2. A group of LGBTQ+ young people (13-21 years old) who have never been in a full DBT programme but experienced similar difficulties.

3. A group of DBT therapists who have supported LGBTQ+ young people before.

The investigators will seek feedback from participants about how acceptable they found the study (e.g. how satisfied they were with the process), how feasible it was (e.g. were they able to attend and was it practice?), and how well they stuck to the coproduction principles (e.g. how supported they felt).

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
32
Inclusion Criteria

Not provided

Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Study & Design

Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Study Design
Not specified
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Feasibility/AttritionBaseline, during the focus groups (12 weeks in duration), and at outcome measure completion (12 weeks from baseline)

Participant attrition rates at baseline, during the study, and at outcome measure completion (12 weeks from baseline).

Feasibility/Focus Group Content and DeliveryFor the duration of the focus groups (12 weeks)

The count frequency of focus groups, individual sessions, and duration of each taken will be recorded. The content of the focus groups will be documented. The number of facilitators of each type will also be documented.

Feasibility/RecruitmentBaseline

Whether the investigators are able to recruit the intended numbers of participants to each group by the start of the focus groups (baseline).

Acceptability/Session SatisfactionAt the end of each focus group (6 focus groups over 12 weeks)

Self-report question at the end of each focus group/individual session: How satisfied were you with the focus group/individual session? \[Response Options: Very Satisfied, Satisfied, Neutral, Unsatisfied, Very Unsatisfied\].

\[Prompt\] Can you tell us why you gave that rating? \[Prompt\] what would have improved your satisfaction?

Acceptability/Satisfaction with the StudyEnd of Study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

How satisfied were you with the focus group/individual sessions overall? Response Options: Very Satisfied, Satisfied, Neutral, Unsatisfied, Very Unsatisfied. Prompts to elicit qualitative feedback.

How satisfied were you with the final version of the intervention protocols that we all produced together? Response Options: Very Satisfied, Satisfied, Neutral, Unsatisfied, Very Unsatisfied. Prompts to elicit qualitative feedback.

Acceptability/Recommend to OthersEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

Would you recommend this study to other potential LGBTQ+ people if we were to run the study again? \[Response Options\] Yes, No, Maybe \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why you gave that rating?

Acceptability/HelpfulnessEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

Did you find participating in this study helpful to you? \[Response Options\] Yes, No, Maybe \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why you have that rating? \[Prompt\] What would have made it more useful?

Acceptability/EngagementEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

\[Acceptability/Engagement.\] What helped you to engage in the focus groups?\[Acceptability/Engagement.\] What got in the way of engaging in the focus groups?

Acceptability/Cultural SensitivityEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study Feedback:

\[Acceptability/Cultural Sensitivity.\] Did the content of the focus groups feel respectful and relevant for LGBTQ+ culture and potential intersecting cultures within the community? \[Response Options\] Yes, No, Maybe \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why you gave that rating? \[Prompt\] Were there any blind spots in this regard? \[Prompt\] What could we have done differently to improve respect and relevance? \[Prompt\] What worked well in this regard?

Feasibility/GeneralEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

How feasible was it for you to take part in this project? \[Prompt\] Feasible means how possible it was to do this easily or conveniently. \[Response Options\] Very Feasible, Feasible, Neither Feasible or Unfeasible, Unfeasible, Very Unfeasible \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why you gave that rating? \[Prompt\] What made it more feasible? \[Prompt\] What were the barriers to it being feasible?

Feasibility/PracticalitiesEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

\[Feasibility/Practicality.\] Can you tell us how you found the practicalities of the workshop, including but not limited to the timings, the environment they were conducted in (online vs in-person), the types of activities used, and so forth? \[Prompt\] cover any in the list which the participant did not speak to \[Prompt\] How did this impact the feasibility of taking part, if at all? \[Prompt\] What would you recommend to improve any future similar studies in regards to practicalities?

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
WellbeingEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

End of study feedback:

\[Wellbeing.\] Did taking part in this project have any impact on your wellbeing? This can be positive, negative, or neutral?

Co-Production Process/RespectEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

My contributions within the whole study felt respected and acknowledged. \[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\]. \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What worked well? \[Prompt\] What worked less well? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

Co-Production Process/SupportEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

I felt adequately supported within the whole study (e.g. my expenses were covered, I was offered support if needed, my questions were answered, etc).

\[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\]. \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What made you feel supported? \[Prompt\] What didn't make you feel supported? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

Co-production Process/TransparencyEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

The aims of the study and of my involvement were clear to me. \[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\] \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What worked well? \[Prompt\] What worked less well? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

Co-Production Process/ResponsivenessEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

I felt listened to and like my contributions were responded to in the study. \[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\]. \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What worked well? \[Prompt\] What worked less well? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

Co-Production Process/Fairness of OpportunitiesEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

I felt like everyone was given fair opportunities, especially in the context of diversity within the group? \[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\]. \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What worked well? \[Prompt\] What worked less well? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

Co-production Process/AccountabilityEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

I felt accountable for my involvement in the study and was able to provide feedback.

\[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\]. \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What worked well? \[Prompt\] What worked less well? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

Co-Production/EmpowermentEnd of study (12 weeks post baseline)

Did you feel empowered to take part in the study? \[Response Options: Very True, True, Neutral, Untrue, Very Untrue\]. \[Prompt\] Can you tell us why? \[Prompt\] What worked well? \[Prompt\] What worked less well? \[Prompt\] Recommendations for improving this?

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath