ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2020
Comparison of a co-produced mental health service to traditional services: A co-produced mixed-methods cross-sectional study.
Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Service user involvement in mental health service commissioning, development and delivery: A systematic review of service level outcomes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluating the role and effectiveness of co-produced community-based mental health interventions that aim to reduce suicide among adults: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Co-Production within Child and Adolescent Mental Health: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Co-Production Performance Evaluation in Healthcare. A Systematic Review of Methods, Tools and Metrics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Co-producing adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) care in South Africa: A patient-centred framework for agency, trust, satisfaction and continuity.The South African journal of psychiatry : SAJP : the journal of the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa · 2026Article
- Lived experience in Italian mental health services: a national survey of peer support and co-production practices.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Towards Coproduction in Mental Health Academia: A Cooperative Inquiry.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
- "A Feeling of Safeness and Freedom": The Promotion of Mental Health Recovery Through Co-Production in an Italian Community Organization.Community mental health journal · 2024Article
- 'ALL ABOUT MY IDEAL MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE': Users, family members and experts by experience discussing a co-designed service.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- A qualitative evaluation of a co-design process involving young people at risk of suicide.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Grounding co-writing: An analysis of the theoretical basis of a new approach in mental health care.Journal of psychiatric and mental health nursing · 2023Article
- Research on Students' Mental Health Based on Data Mining Algorithms.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Healthy Living and Co-Production: Evaluation of Processes and Outcomes of a Health Promotion Initiative Co-Produced with Adolescents.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates the differences between a co-produced experimental mental health centre and traditional day centres. For this purpose, we used a collaborative and mixed-method approach in two complementary studies: (i) a quantitative cross-sectional study designed to compare users' hospitalization rates and their use of psychiatric medications and (ii) a qualitative study designed to explore and document the experienced differences between co-produced and traditional services. In the quantitative cross-sectional study, surveys were administered to 37 users of one co-produced mental health service and to 40 users of traditional mental health services. A negative binomial regression analysis was performed to examine the relationships between predictors and users' hospitalization rates. After adjusting for the potential confounders, users of the co-produced centre reported a 63.2% reduced rate of hospitalizations compared with users of traditional mental health services (P = 0.002). Furthermore, 39% of users of the co-produced centre reported a reduction or even withdrawal from psychiatric medications against 22% of the comparison group (P = 0.036). In the qualitative study, six main differences emerged from a thematic analysis of a large user-led focus group. In the participants' experiences, the co-produced service focused on (i) parity and respectful relationships, (ii) people's strengths, (iii) freedom, (iv) psychological continuity, (v) social inclusion, and (vi) recovery orientation. Our research provides empirical evidence concerning the 'preventive aspect' of co-produced mental health services. Additionally, new insights into how different stakeholders, particularly users of co-produced mental health services, experience the differences between co-produced and traditional mental health services are provided.
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.