Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24632847›Full record

SynthesisSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2014

Effectiveness of peer-delivered interventions for severe mental illness and depression on clinical and psychosocial outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Daniela C Fuhr, Tatiana Taylor Salisbury, Mary J De Silva, Najia Atif, Nadja van Ginneken, Atif Rahman, Vikram Patel

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04639167 (Volunteer-led "Paths to Everyday Life"), which is not on this map. Cited by 82 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
18.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04639167 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Volunteer-led "Paths to Everyday Life" (PEER) Peer Support Group Intervention to Adults With Mental Health Difficulties Versus Service as Usual in the Community - Results From a Randomized Two-armed, Multi-municipal, Superiority Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmager HospitalRan2020 to 2023Enrolled299ConditionsMental Health Impairment, Peer Group, Mental Health Disorder, Problems PsychosocialArmsPaths to everyday life (PEER)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

82 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 204 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Daniela C FuhrCentre for Global Mental Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, WC1E 7HT, UK, daniela.fuhr@lshtm.ac.uk.
Tatiana Taylor Salisbury
Mary J De Silva
Najia Atif
Nadja van Ginneken
Atif Rahman
Vikram Patel
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of London · GBHuman Development Research Foundation · PKUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

South Asian Hub for Advocacy, Research & Education on Mental Health (SHARE)U19MH095687 · NIMH · LONDON SCH/HYGIENE & TROPICAL MEDICINE · PI RAHMAN, ATIF, SHIDHAYE, RAHUL RAMCHANDRA · 2011 to 2015
$2.9M
NIMH NIH HHS 1U19MH095687-01NIMH NIH HHS U19 MH095687Wellcome Trust 084674Wellcome Trust 091834Wellcome Trust 100714
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the effectiveness of peer-delivered interventions in improving clinical and psychosocial outcomes among individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) or depression.

methodsSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing a peer-delivered intervention to treatment as usual or treatment delivered by a health professional. Random effect meta-analyses were performed separately for SMI and depression interventions.

resultsFourteen studies (10 SMI studies, 4 depression studies), all from high-income countries, met the inclusion criteria. For SMI, evidence from three high-quality superiority trials showed small positive effects favouring peer-delivered interventions for quality of life (SMD 0.24, 95 % CI 0.08-0.40, p = 0.003, I (2) = 0 %, n = 639) and hope (SMD 0.24, 95 % CI 0.02-0.46, p = 0.03, I (2) = 65 %, n = 967). Results of two SMI equivalence trials indicated that peers may be equivalent to health professionals in improving clinical symptoms (SMD -0.14, 95 % CI -0.57 to 0.29, p = 0.51, I (2) = 0 %, n = 84) and quality of life (SMD -0.11, 95 % CI -0.42 to 0.20, p = 0.56, I (2) = 0 %, n = 164). No effect of peer-delivered interventions for depression was observed on any outcome.

conclusionsThe limited evidence base suggests that peers may have a small additional impact on patient's outcomes, in comparison to standard psychiatric care in high-income settings. Future research should explore the use and applicability of peer-delivered interventions in resource poor settings where standard care is likely to be of lower quality and coverage. The positive findings of equivalence trials demand further research in this area to consolidate the relative value of peer-delivered vs. professional-delivered interventions.

Indexed as

Peer GroupDepressionHumansMental DisordersPsychotherapyQuality of LifeTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24632847
PMCPMC4167169
OpenAlexW2163176726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.