Interest in youth perspectives on what constitutes an important outcome in the treatment of depression has been growing, but limited attention has been given to heterogeneity in outcome priorities, and minority viewpoints. These are important to consider for person-centred outcome tracking in clinical practice, or when conducting clinical trials targeting specific populations. This study used Q-methodology to identify outcome priority profiles among youth with lived experience of service use for depression. A purposive sample of 28 youth (aged 16–21 years) rank-ordered 35 outcome statements by importance and completed brief semi-structured interviews eliciting their sorting rationales. By-person principal component analysis was used to identify outcome priority profiles based on all Q-sort configurations. Priority profiles were described and interpreted with reference to the qualitative interview data. Four distinct outcome priority profiles were identified: “Relieving distress and experiencing a happier emotional state”; “Learning to cope with cyclical distressing emotional states”; “Understanding and processing distressing emotional states”; and “Reduced interference of ongoing distressing emotional states with daily life”. All four profiles prioritized improvements in mood and the ability to feel pleasure but differed in the level of importance assigned to learning coping skills, processing experiences, and the reduced interference of depression with life and identity. As part of a person-centered approach to care delivery, care providers should routinely engage young people in conversation and shared decision-making about the types of change they would like to prioritize and track during treatment, beyond a common core of consensus outcomes.

A major barrier to improving care effectiveness for mental health is a lack of consensus on outcomes measurement. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) has already developed a consensus-based standard set of outcomes for anxiety and depression in adults (including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7-item Scale, and the WHO Disability Schedule). This Position Paper reports on recommendations specifically for anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder in children and young people aged between 6 and 24 years. An international ICHOM working group of 27 clinical, research, and lived experience experts formed a consensus through teleconferences, an exercise using an adapted Delphi technique (a method for reaching group consensus), and iterative anonymous voting, supported by sequential research inputs. A systematic scoping review identified 70 possible outcomes and 107 relevant measurement instruments. Measures were appraised for their feasibility in routine practice (ie, brevity, free availability, validation in children and young people, and language translation) and psychometric performance (ie, validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change). The final standard set recommends tracking symptoms, suicidal thoughts and behaviour, and functioning as a minimum through seven primarily patient-reported outcome measures: the Revised Children’s Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Obsessive Compulsive Inventory for Children, the Children’s Revised Impact of Events Scale, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale, the KIDSCREEN-10, the Children’s Global Assessment Scale, and the Child Anxiety Life Interference Scale. The set’s recommendations were validated through a feedback survey involving 487 participants across 45 countries. The set should be used alongside the anxiety and depression standard set for adults with clinicians selecting age-appropriate measures.