ArticleBMC psychiatry2019
Assessing social recovery of vulnerable youth in global mental health settings: a pilot study of clinical research tools in Malaysia.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA social recovery approach to youth mental health focuses on increasing the time spent in valuable and meaningful structured activities, with a view to preventing enduring mental health problems and social disability. In Malaysia, access to mental health care is particularly limited and little research has focused on identifying young people at risk of serious socially disabling mental health problems such as psychosis. We provide preliminary evidence for the feasibility and acceptability of core social recovery assessment tools in a Malaysian context, comparing the experiential process of engaging young Malaysian participants in social recovery assessments with prior accounts from a UK sample.
methodsNine vulnerable young people from low-income backgrounds were recruited from a non-government social enterprise and partner organisations in Peninsular Malaysia. Participants completed a battery of social recovery assessment tools (including time use, unusual experiences, self-schematic beliefs and values). Time for completion and completion rates were used as indices of feasibility. Acceptability was examined using qualitative interviews in which participants were asked to reflect on the experience of completing the assessment tools. Following a deductive approach, the themes were examined for fit with previous UK qualitative accounts of social recovery assessments.
resultsFeasibility was indicated by relatively efficient completion time and high completion rates. Qualitative interviews highlighted the perceived benefits of social recovery assessments, such as providing psychoeducation, aiding in self-reflection and stimulating goal setting, in line with findings from UK youth samples.
conclusionsWe provide preliminary evidence for the feasibility and acceptability of social recovery assessment tools in a low-resource context, comparing the experiential process of engaging young Malaysian participants in social recovery assessments with prior accounts from a UK sample. We also suggest that respondents may derive some personal and psychoeducational benefits from participating in assessments (e.g. of their time use and mental health) within a social recovery framework.
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.