Table 1 Young Adult Research Partner (YARP) roles and processes of partnership by study phase

Recruitment

Advisor: gives advice

YARP reviewed all email drafts and recruitment flyers developed by the first author to ensure materials were clear, written in accessible and youth-friendly language, and used appealing visuals.

Partner: works as an equal partner

Additionally, the YARP developed their own recruitment flyers and social media content (i.e., engaging videos shared on TikTok and Instagram) to share with prospective participants as these platforms would reach our target age group. Lastly, the YARP shared study information with individuals within their networks and community organizations to facilitate recruitment.

Interview guide development

Partner: works as an equal partner

At the request of the YARP, a draft interview guide was written by the first author with a series of headings (e.g., background, intersections between health and mental health, transition readiness). The YARP reviewed the draft and elected to meet several times over a one-month period without the first author present to brainstorm and share ideas about each section of the guide. Next, the YARP assigned each partner to a different section of the guide and created a collaborative document that could be updated in real-time. The YARP were each responsible for reviewing their own section, adjusting the language of existing questions to enhance the guide’s youth-friendliness, and using their lived experience to compose their own relevant, open-ended questions. The YARP and first author then met, and each partner shared their edits, suggestions, and ideas about the guide with the group. The final interview was agreed upon by the first author and the YARP

Data collection

Listener: is given information

The first author was responsible for conducting the interviews. Reflections about the interviews, the richness of the data, preliminary concepts arising in the interviews, and the processes of data collection were shared with YARP in monthly video-conference team meetings by the first author. Reflexive discussions focused on positionality, biases, assumptions, and values were held amongst the group

Data analysis

Co-thinker: is asked to give opinion

The first author reviewed all interview transcripts and created an initial version of the codebook. The YARP were given the option to individually review interview transcripts and the codebook, highlighting the concepts, ideas, and codes they each felt were most pertinent to present in this article. Next, in a video-conference team meeting facilitated by the first author, the YARP came together to share their perspectives on which codes and subsequent themes should be included in this article. Their opinions on impactful codes and quotes were presented either verbally, or in written form (using shared documents including Google Jamboard, Google Docs) based on their individual preferences. Following a review of each YARP’s perceptions of the most prominent concepts, the first author and the YARP reached consensus about the final codes/themes by way of two video-conference group discussions, allowing the YARP to share their opinions on the language, final tables/figures, and illustrative quotes presented in this article.

Knowledge translation

Partner: works as an equal partner

The YARP were involved in the preparation of conference presentation materials, delivered co-presentations at academic conferences and community events, and contributed to the preparation of this article.

Decision-maker: takes initiative, (final) decision

The YARP worked individually and collaboratively to develop and share social media content related to this study on our project specific TikTok and Instagram accounts. Accordingly, they took initiative to creatively disseminate the findings of this study and our partnership to relevant stakeholders (e.g., youth, caregivers, clinicians, researchers) and made final decisions about the content and method(s) of delivery.