Citizens' Jury as a Strategy to Increase Social Participation Among Older People

Social participation is essential for healthy ageing. Older people must engage in social, political and cultural activities. Institutions must create spaces that enable their involvement. Citizens' jury (CJ) is a strategy that promotes participation by involving citizens in deliberative processes. We organised a CJ with older people at the National Institute of Geriatrics (INGER) to identify ageing-related research priorities for the institute.

We conducted a CJ of older people. While there's no standard procedure for performing it, four elements are central: the jury, experts, facilitators and observers. Four researchers from INGER-representing basic, clinical, socio-demographic and technological research areas-served as expert presenters. The CJ was held over 2 days in January 2025. Jurors were asked: What are the priority ageing research topics that should be investigated at the INGER?

The jury included 27 people, mainly aged 60-69, most of them women, and 74% had at least a bachelor's degree. The basic research area received the least attention, while the clinical and social areas drew more interest. Technology also emerged as a relevant area. Jurors highlighted overlooked topics such as emotional and sexual health, which are rarely investigated within the institute. They also stressed the need for better dissemination, prevention-oriented research, intersectoral collaboration, and the active inclusion of older people in the research process. The jury called for a more comprehensive, life-course and intersectional research perspective.

The CJ is a deliberative strategy that can be used to foster social participation among older people. It enables their active involvement in diverse public issues, such as the identification of research priorities. Additionally, we enhance knowledge translation by promoting research agendas with topics that matter to this age group.

Jury participants were the central element that made this strategy possible. They received enough information from experts on the different ageing research areas and actively engaged in deliberation. Their role went beyond giving opinions; they participated in the identification and prioritisation of research topics.