Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32028906›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2020

Negotiating support from relationships and resources: a longitudinal study examining the role of personal support networks in the management of severe and enduring mental health problems.

Helen Louise Brooks, Penny Bee, Karina Lovell, Anne Rogers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Understanding support systems for Parkinson's disease management in community settings: A cross-national qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Helen Louise BrooksDepartment of Health Services Research, Institute of Population Health Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. helen.brooks@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2157-0200
Penny BeeMental Health Research Group, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Karina LovellMental Health Research Group, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Anne RogersNIHR CLAHRC Wessex, Faculty of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBUniversity of Southampton · GB

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-1210-12007Programme Grants for Applied Research RP-PG-1210-12007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersonal communities or personal support networks comprise a variety of social ties considered important to individuals in their everyday lives. This set of active and significant ties influence the capacity to manage mental health problems because of the potential to access social support. However, little is known in the context of people's everyday management of mental health about how relationships with people, places, objects and activities are navigated and negotiated. This study aimed to explore the nature and negotiation of support from personal communities in the everyday management of severe and enduring mental health problems.

methodsA longitudinal qualitative study undertaken in the UK incorporating 79 interviews with 29 participants based on personal network mapping. 29 users of mental health services with a diagnosis of severe and enduring mental illness were interviewed at three time points. Data was analysed using an inductive thematic approach underpinned by the Network Episode Model.

resultsThe presence and maintenance of interpersonal trust was a fundamental condition of the relational work required to develop, undertake and sustain relationships with others. Whilst relationships with spouses, family members and friends were generally viewed positively, the work required to engage human others was contingent, vicarious and overlain with felt and enacted stigma. Developing relationships with others was hindered by a lack of confidence fuelled by the experience of mental illness and a fear of rejection or failure. By contrast, weaker ties and inanimate objects and places offered and provided a sense of reliability and security. Strategies employed by participants in order to garner sufficient support for condition management in the light of these particular challenges are illuminated by the discussion of who and what is relevant and valued in personal support networks.

conclusionsAccess to valued activities, hobbies and things should be considered alongside human relationships in providing a means of ongoing support and resource for the everyday management of life for those experiencing severe and enduring mental health problems.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersPsychosocial Support SystemsSocial NetworkingAdultFamilyFemaleFriendsHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMental HealthQualitative ResearchSelf-ManagementSocial Validity, ResearchMental health self-managementPersonal communitiesPersonal support networksQualitativeRelational workValued activities

Identifiers

PMID32028906
PMCPMC7006131
OpenAlexW3008283462

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.