Developing involvement during a programme of recovery research

Slade, Mike; Trivedi, Premila; Chandler, Ruth; Leamy, Mary

doi:10.1108/jmhtep-01-2016-0006

Cited by 7 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although they broadly move from lower (Approach 1) to higher (Approach 4) involvement, they cannot be simplistically allocated to a level of involvement. For example, in RECOLLECT the academic researchers included people with a range of lived experience, several study applicants self-identified as having lived experience, and the PI has published and been influenced by PPI impact assessment studies [ 60 , 61 ]. Similarly, the PPI group had members with a range of research experience.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: methodology development and refinement

Jennings

Slade

Bates³

et al. 2018

BMC Psychiatry

Self Cite

121

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPatient and Public Involvement (PPI) in mental health research is increasing, especially in early (pre-funding) stages. PPI is less consistent in later stages, including in analysing qualitative data. The aims of this study were to develop a methodology for involving PPI co-researchers in collaboratively analysing qualitative mental health research data with academic researchers, to pilot and refine this methodology, and to create a best practice framework for collaborative data analysis (CDA) of qualitative mental health research.MethodsIn the context of the RECOLLECT Study of Recovery Colleges, a critical literature review of collaborative data analysis studies was conducted, to identify approaches and recommendations for successful CDA. A CDA methodology was developed and then piloted in RECOLLECT, followed by refinement and development of a best practice framework.ResultsFrom 10 included publications, four CDA approaches were identified: (1) consultation, (2) development, (3) application and (4) development and application of coding framework. Four characteristics of successful CDA were found: CDA process is co-produced; CDA process is realistic regarding time and resources; demands of the CDA process are manageable for PPI co-researchers; and group expectations and dynamics are effectively managed. A four-meeting CDA process was piloted to co-produce a coding framework based on qualitative data collected in RECOLLECT and to create a mental health service user-defined change model relevant to Recovery Colleges. Formal and informal feedback demonstrated active involvement. The CDA process involved an extra 80 person-days of time (40 from PPI co-researchers, 40 from academic researchers). The process was refined into a best practice framework comprising Preparation, CDA and Application phases.ConclusionsThis study has developed a typology of approaches to collaborative analysis of qualitative data in mental health research, identified from available evidence the characteristics of successful involvement, and developed, piloted and refined the first best practice framework for collaborative analysis of qualitative data. This framework has the potential to support meaningful PPI in data analysis in the context of qualitative mental health research studies, a previously neglected yet central part of the research cycle.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: methodology development and refinement

Jennings

Slade

Bates³

et al. 2018

BMC Psychiatry

Self Cite

121

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on the REFOCUS project [ 55 , 56 ], and consistent with the commitment to co-design [ 10 , 11 ], PULSAR is also supported by LEAP, an advisory group comprising people with either lived experience of mental illness or with experience of caring for someone with mental illness. LEAP was established at the commencement of the PULSAR project and continues to meet during the trial.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The PULSAR Specialist Care protocol: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized control trial of a training intervention for community mental health teams in recovery-oriented practice

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRecovery features strongly in Australian mental health policy; however, evidence is limited for the efficacy of recovery-oriented practice at the service level. This paper describes the Principles Unite Local Services Assisting Recovery (PULSAR) Specialist Care trial protocol for a recovery-oriented practice training intervention delivered to specialist mental health services staff. The primary aim is to evaluate whether adult consumers accessing services where staff have received the intervention report superior recovery outcomes compared to adult consumers accessing services where staff have not yet received the intervention. A qualitative sub-study aims to examine staff and consumer views on implementing recovery-oriented practice. A process evaluation sub-study aims to articulate important explanatory variables affecting the interventions rollout and outcomes.MethodsThe mixed methods design incorporates a two-step stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) examining cross-sectional data from three phases, and nested qualitative and process evaluation sub-studies. Participating specialist mental health care services in Melbourne, Victoria are divided into 14 clusters with half randomly allocated to receive the staff training in year one and half in year two. Research participants are consumers aged 18–75 years who attended the cluster within a previous three-month period either at baseline, 12 (step 1) or 24 months (step 2). In the two nested sub-studies, participation extends to cluster staff. The primary outcome is the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery collected from 756 consumers (252 each at baseline, step 1, step 2). Secondary and other outcomes measuring well-being, service satisfaction and health economic impact are collected from a subset of 252 consumers (63 at baseline; 126 at step 1; 63 at step 2) via interviews. Interview-based longitudinal data are also collected 12 months apart from 88 consumers with a psychotic disorder diagnosis (44 at baseline, step 1; 44 at step 1, step 2). cRCT data will be analyzed using multilevel mixed-effects modelling to account for clustering and some repeated measures, supplemented by thematic analysis of qualitative interview data. The process evaluation will draw on qualitative, quantitative and documentary data.DiscussionFindings will provide an evidence-base for the continued transformation of Australian mental health service frameworks toward recovery.Trial RegistrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12614000957695. Date registered: 8 September 2014.

show abstract

“…This service-user led study significantly adds to the evidence base of this topic by acknowledging that self-harm recovery is multidimensional, subjective, and not entirely dependent on behavioral cessation. This is contrary to clinical recovery definitions in mainstream psychiatric discourse which still predicate mental illness recovery on the basis of the individual returning to "pre-morbid functioning" (van Eck et al, 2018;Leamy et al, 2011;Roosenschoon et al, 2019;Slade et al, 2016). This arises from the biomedical model's leaning toward symptom eradication, which inherently lends itself to a cessation model of recovery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

How do people conceptualize self‐harm recovery and what helps in adolescence, young and middle adulthood? A qualitative meta‐synthesis

Lewin,

Leamy,

Palmer

2023

J Clin Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveSelf‐harm can be understood as any behavior individuals use to harm themselves, irrespective of motive. Evidence has extensively examined the epidemiology and function of self‐harm to the individual, but less is known about the subjective processes underpinning recovery. Such insights could inform therapeutic interventions to better support individuals. The present aim was to synthesize qualitative themes from eligible literature to identify how adolescents, young adults, and those in middle adulthood conceptualize self‐harm recovery and the factors impacting this process.MethodsEleven studies were identified from a systematic search of five electronic research databases: PsycINFO, Embase, Medline, Global Health, and CINAHL. Studies were critically appraised using an adapted Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool for qualitative research. A meta‐synthesis was conducted using reflexive thematic analysis to generate themes across the included studies.ResultsThemes depicted recovery as a multidimensional, nonlinear, and subjective process, characterized by a “push and pull” between states of (re‐)engagement and cessation/reduction. Transition between these states was influenced by intrapersonal and interpersonal factors which were embedded in a wider milieu of the meaning of self‐harm to the individual.ConclusionContemporary ideas of symptom eradication as the only marker of complete recovery may hinder individuals in the long‐term, presenting an obstacle both to quality of life and therapeutic progress. Movement away from self‐harm recovery as a uniform or singular phenomenon could enhance person‐centered care.

show abstract

Developing involvement during a programme of recovery research

Cited by 7 publications

References 8 publications

Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: methodology development and refinement

Best practice framework for Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) in collaborative data analysis of qualitative mental health research: methodology development and refinement

The PULSAR Specialist Care protocol: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized control trial of a training intervention for community mental health teams in recovery-oriented practice

How do people conceptualize self‐harm recovery and what helps in adolescence, young and middle adulthood? A qualitative meta‐synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About