ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2010
'What difference does it make?' Finding evidence of the impact of mental health service user researchers on research into the experiences of detained psychiatric patients.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
55 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of participatory research involving forensic mental health patients.BMC psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Meaningful patient and public involvement in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Sleep disruption and its psychological treatment in young people at risk of psychosis: A peer methods qualitative evaluation.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026Trial
- "It Felt Good to Be Able to Say That Out Loud"-Therapeutic Alliance and Processes in AVATAR Therapy for People Who Hear Distressing Voices: Peer-Led Qualitative Study.JMIR mental health · 2026Trial
- The service user experience of SlowMo therapy: A co-produced thematic analysis of service users' subjective experience.Psychology and psychotherapy · 2022Trial
- The impact of Patient and Public Involvement in the SlowMo study: Reflections on peer innovation.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Trial
- Patient involvement in developing a patient-targeted feedback intervention after depression screening in primary care within the randomized controlled trial GET.FEEDBACK.GP.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Trial
- Understanding the roles and experiences of mental health peer support workers in England: a qualitative interview study.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Research in Partnership With Older People-Involvement in Conducting and Analysing Focus Groups.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Observational
- Article
- The Importance of Grey and Qualitative Literature in Developing Domestic Violence and Abuse and Child Maltreatment Core Outcome Sets: A Brief Report.Journal of family violence · 2025Article
- Supporting movement and physical activity in people with psychosis: A qualitative exploration of the carer perspective.The International journal of social psychiatry · 2024Article
- Article
- Framework for understanding movement and physical activity in patients diagnosed with psychosis.BMJ mental health · 2024Article
- A Safe Place to Learn: Peer Research Qualitative Investigation of gameChange Virtual Reality Therapy.JMIR serious games · 2023Article
- A life more ordinary: A peer research method qualitative study of the Feeling Safe Programme for persecutory delusions.Psychology and psychotherapy · 2022Article
- Lessons learnt from delivering the public and patient involvement forums within a younger onset dementia project.Dementia (London, England) · 2022Article
- A qualitative study on the involvement of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer during multiple research phases: "plan, structure, and discuss".Research involvement and engagement · 2022Article
- The psychological journey of weight gain in psychosis.Psychology and psychotherapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterest in the involvement of members of the public in health services research is increasingly focussed on evaluation of the impact of involvement on the research process and the production of knowledge about health. Service user involvement in mental health research is well-established, yet empirical studies into the impact of involvement are lacking.
objectiveTo investigate the potential to provide empirical evidence of the impact of service user researchers (SURs) on the research process.
designThe study uses a range of secondary analyses of interview transcripts from a qualitative study of the experiences of psychiatric patients detained under the Mental Health Act (1983) to compare the way in which SURs and conventional university researchers (URs) conduct and analyse qualitative interviews.
resultsAnalyses indicated some differences in the ways in which service user- and conventional URs conducted qualitative interviews. SURs were much more likely to code (analyse) interview transcripts in terms of interviewees' experiences and feelings, while conventional URs coded the same transcripts largely in terms of processes and procedures related to detention. The limitations of a secondary analysis based on small numbers of researchers are identified and discussed.
conclusionsThe study demonstrates the potential to develop a methodologically robust approach to evaluate empirically the impact of SURs on research process and findings, and is indicative of the potential benefits of collaborative research for informing evidence-based practice in mental health services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.