Predictors of non-attendance to healthcare appointments in young people with long-term conditions: a systematic review protocol

Le résumé fourni par la source

INTRODUCTION: Non-attendance to healthcare appointments among young people with long-term conditions (LTCs) presents significant challenges to continuity of care and clinical outcomes. Although factors associated with non-attendance have been explored in broader populations, there remains an evidence gap concerning the specific drivers among adolescents and young adults aged 10-24 years living with chronic physical or mental health conditions. This review aims to identify and synthesise factors associated with healthcare appointment non-attendance among young people with LTCs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review and narrative synthesis of peer-reviewed quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies reporting factors associated with non-attendance among young people with LTCs. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and CINAHL will be searched from database inception. Searches will be conducted in March 2026 and will include studies with no geographic restrictions, and with eligibility extended to any language where translated full text is available. Two reviewers will independently screen studies, extract data and assess risk of bias using the ROBINS-I (quantitative), Critical Appraisal skills programme (qualitative) or mixed-methods appraisal tool (mixed-methods). A narrative synthesis will be undertaken, grouping factors thematically and comparing findings by age subgroup, condition type (physical vs mental health) and socioeconomic/geographical context. Reporting will follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as no primary data will be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and relevant conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251080477.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.