Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28638952›Full record

ArticleCommunity mental health journal2018

Assessing the Impact and Effectiveness of Hearing Voices Network Self-Help Groups.

Eleanor Longden, John Read, Jacqui Dillon

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Community mental health journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Conceptualizing a less paranoid schizophrenia.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Eleanor LongdenInstitute of Psychology, Health and Society, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. Eleanor.Longden@gmw.nhs.uk.
John ReadSchool of Psychology, University of East London, London, UK.
Jacqui DillonNational Hearing Voices Network, Sheffield, UK.
NIHR Nottingham Hearing Biomedical Research Unit · GBUniversity of East London · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Hearing Voices Network (HVN) is an influential service-user led organisation that promotes self-help as an important aspect of recovery. This study presents the first systematic assessment of the impact and effectiveness of HVN self-help groups. A customized 45-item questionnaire, the Hearing Voices Groups Survey, was sent to 62 groups affiliated with the English HVN. 101 responses were received. Group attendance was credited with a range of positive emotional, social and clinical outcomes. Aspects that were particularly valued included: opportunities to meet other voice hearers, provision of support that was unavailable elsewhere, and the group being a safe and confidential place to discuss difficult issues. Participants perceived HVN groups to facilitate recovery processes and to be an important resource for helping them cope with their experiences. Mental health professionals can use their expertise to support the successful running of these groups.

Indexed as

Self-Help GroupsAdultHallucinationsHumansMaleMental DisordersPatient SatisfactionProgram EvaluationPsychotherapy, GroupSurveys and QuestionnairesGroup psychotherapyOutpatient treatmentPsychosocial interventionsPsychotic disordersSocial functioningVocational rehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID28638952
OpenAlexW2633080615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.