ArticleInternational journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being2020
Co-creating a process of user involvement and shared decision-making in coordinated care planning with users and caregivers in social services.
Article in International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supported decision-making interventions in mental healthcare: A systematic review of current evidence and implementation barriers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Tensions as productive forces in coproduced mental health research: an explorative qualitative study.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Article
- User and staff experiences of a revised process for coordinating support with shared decision making in the comorbidity field of practice: a qualitative interview study.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2025Article
- Professionals' and Families' Perspectives on Essential Elements of Shared Decision-Making: A Qualitative Analysis on Families with Multiple and Enduring Problems in Integrated Youth Care.Administration and policy in mental health · 2025Article
- Triadic Perspectives on Decision Making in Psychiatry: A Qualitative Study on Service Users, Caregivers and Healthcare Professionals in Latvia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Health and social care staff's experiences working with adults with complex needs - a focus group study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Using normalisation process theory to identify factors facilitating the scaling up of parenting programs for immigrant parents.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Developing sustainable service user involvement practices in mental health services in Sweden: the "Userinvolve" research program protocol.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Legitimizing user knowledge in mental health services: Epistemic (in)justice and barriers to knowledge integration.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- How do users with comorbidity perceive participation in social services? A qualitative interview study.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAlthough user participation and shared decision-making in formal statutory coordinated care planning are described as central, they remain to be implemented. The aim of this study is to explore how collaboration and shared decision-making in the social services can be realized in formal care planning activities with people with mental disabilities.
methodsWe conducted eight workshops with 12 users and 17 caregivers to investigate existing barriers to and possible solutions for participation in coordinated care planning.
resultsWorkshop formats and techniques from participatory design generated rich research materials illustrating challenges currently experienced by users and caregivers in care planning work, as well as a large variety of solutions to these challenges. They also illustrated differences in how participation is understood and the conditions required to realize shared decision-making between users and caregivers.
conclusionsAn improved coordinated individual plan (CIP) process emerged, based on the active participation of users and caregivers. This process is a familiar and transparent process for users and caregivers, reflecting the needs and preferences of users at all stages. It requires careful preparation and collaboration with the users, as well as caregiver flexibility.
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.