Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31864315›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2019

The mechanisms and processes of connection: developing a causal chain model capturing impacts of receiving recorded mental health recovery narratives.

Fiona Ng, Ashleigh Charles, Kristian Pollock, Stefan Rennick-Egglestone, Pim Cuijpers, Steve Gillard, Lian van der Krieke, Rob Bongaardt, Scott Pomberth, Julie Repper and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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

17 authors.

Fiona NgSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. fiona.ng@nottingham.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8656-8830
Ashleigh CharlesSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Kristian PollockSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Stefan Rennick-EgglestoneSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro & Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Steve GillardPopulation Health Research Institute, St. George's University of London, London, UK.
Lian van der KriekeUniversity Medical Center Groningen, University Center of Psychiatry, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Rob BongaardtDepartment of Health, Social and Welfare Studies, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway, Porsgrunn, Norway.
Scott PomberthNottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Julie RepperImplementing Recovery for Organisational Change (ImROC), Nottingham, UK.
James RoeNational Institute for Health Research, ARC East Midlands, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Joy Llewellyn-BeardsleySchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Caroline YeoSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Ada HuiSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Laurie Hare-DukeSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
David ManleyNottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Mike SladeSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0615-20016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMental health recovery narratives are a core component of recovery-oriented interventions such as peer support and anti-stigma campaigns. A substantial number of recorded recovery narratives are now publicly available online in different modalities and in published books. Whilst the benefits of telling one's story have been investigated, much less is known about how recorded narratives of differing modalities impact on recipients. A previous qualitative study identified connection to the narrator and/or to events in the narrative to be a core mechanism of change. The factors that influence how individuals connect with a recorded narrative are unknown. The aim of the current study was to characterise the immediate effects of receiving recovery narratives presented in a range of modalities (text, video and audio), by establishing the mechanisms of connection and the processes by which connection leads to outcomes.

methodA study involving 40 mental health service users in England was conducted. Participants were presented with up to 10 randomly-selected recovery narratives and were interviewed on the immediate impact of each narrative. Thematic analysis was used to identify the mechanisms of connection and how connection leads to outcome.

resultsReceiving a recovery narrative led participants to reflect upon their own experiences or those of others, which then led to connection through three mechanisms: comparing oneself with the narrative and narrator; learning about other's experiences; and experiencing empathy. These mechanisms led to outcomes through three processes: the identification of change (through attending to narrative structure); the interpretation of change (through attending to narrative content); and the internalisation of interpretations.

conclusionsThis is the first study to identify mechanisms and processes of connection with recorded recovery narratives. The empirically-based causal chain model developed in this study describes the immediate effects on recipients. This model can inform selection of narratives for use in interventions, and be used to support peer support workers in recounting their own recovery narratives in ways which are maximally beneficial to others.

Indexed as

Empirical ResearchMental Health RecoveryModels, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAgedEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMental Health ServicesMiddle AgedNarrationNarrative MedicineQualitative ResearchCausal chain modelConnectionMental healthNarrativeQualitativeRecoveryRecovery narrativeRecovery story

Identifiers

PMID31864315
PMCPMC6925452

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.