Table 1

Summary of participatory action research and human-centred design stages, activities and session plans for the proposed study

PAR and HCD stages	Cyclical activities	Descriptions
Stage 1 (empathise and define)—establishment of AAGs and identification and prioritisation of SRHR concerns	Planning	Project team members work with LHWs to identify and establish AAGs that serve as reference groups and work with project team members. Getting AAG members and agreeing on a time and place for regular sessions. Develop training sessions on SRHR. Develop a summary of findings from projects completed by NPA and Co-PAs.
	Action	Deliver training sessions on SRHR in collaboration with youth research assistants and youth champions. Present and discuss foundational studies in a consultative workshop with AAGs. Systematically identify thematic concerns through small homogenous AAGs and heterogeneous AAGs. Identify and prioritise top thematic concerns.
	Observation	Collect key thematic concerns and priorities generated through AAG discussions, through audio-recording, capture minutes and field notes. A research assistant will record field notes on AAG dynamics and interactions and the discussion’s context.
	Reflection	Reflect within AAGs, compare the reports of each group. The AAGs make sense of what has happened by thinking about how it fits with their experiences and local contexts using criteria.
Stage 2 (ideate and prototype)—planning and co-design the intervention	Planning	Reach a common understanding between AAG and the researchers and assistants on what the research involves and ensure consent to participate. AAG agrees on the time, place, number of sessions per week and duration of the design thinking workshops. Review the thematic priorities identified in Stage 1, discuss, select and prioritise thematic concerns for action as the trial of proof of concepts. Generate a set of solutions and design intervention strategies (ie, Toolkit).
	Action	Conduct design thinking workshops with AAG and develop viable and realistic Toolkit design and content considering their local realities and culture; set evaluation strategies for actions.
	Observation	Observe and document the process through notes and audio-recordings. Evaluate participation and representation.
	Reflection	Continuous reflection throughout the action planning phase on data from observation and field notes and reflection on the action options. Examine whether the proposed improvement methods (ie, Toolkit) are feasible in terms of time, additional resources availability and local experiences.
Stage 3 (test)—implementation and usability testing	Planning	Review of the plan action with AAG and reach an agreement about the way strategies would be put into operation and how to document observations. Designing implementation strategies and action. Discuss and set implementation indicators. Discuss and research consensus on how the AAG will continue with the PAR processes on own.
	Action	Implementation meeting with AAG. Reach an agreement about the way the Toolkit would be put into operation and how to document observations/usability testing. Discuss and research consensus on how the AAG will participate in the Toolkit revisions and continue with the PAR processes on their own.
	Observation	Document the revision process by taking detailed field notes, observing and discussing with AAG members. Preliminary analysis and findings of the feasibility evaluation process will be collected. Conduct informal interviews with AAG to ascertain their perceptions and experiences of the process of PAR.
	Reflection	Conduct evaluation meetings with AAG and collect feedback about the process of the PAR process and reflect on the process of implementation. Identify options for further PAR and action with or without academic researchers.

AAG, adolescent advisory group; Co-PA, Co-Prinicipal Applicant; HCD, human-centred design; LHW, lady health worker; NPA, Nominated Principal Applicant; PAR, participatory action research; SRHR, sexual and reproductive health and rights.