Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33386528›Full record

ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2021

Stakeholder Coalitions and Priorities Around the Policy Goals of a Nation-Wide Mental Health Care Reform.

Pierre Smith, Pablo Nicaise, Sophie Thunus, Inge Neyens, Carole Walker, Vincent Lorant

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Pierre SmithInstitute of Health and Society IRSS, Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium. pierre.smith@uclouvain.be.ORCID 0000-0003-3178-9924
Pablo NicaiseInstitute of Health and Society IRSS, Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.
Sophie ThunusInstitute of Health and Society IRSS, Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.
Inge NeyensLUCAS - Centrum voor zorgonderzoek en consultancy, KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Carole WalkerInstitute of Health and Society IRSS, Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.
Vincent LorantInstitute of Health and Society IRSS, Université Catholique de Louvain, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs 30, 1200, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The difficulty of implementing mental healthcare reforms owes much to the influence of stakeholders. So far, the endorsement of mental health policy reforms by stakeholder coalitions has received little attention. This study describes stakeholder coalitions formed around common mental health policy goals and highlights their central goals and oppositions. Data were collected on the policy priorities of 469 stakeholders (policymakers, service managers, clinicians, and user representatives) involved in the Belgian mental healthcare reform. Four coalitions of stakeholders endorsing different mental health policy goals were identified using a hierarchical cluster analysis on stakeholders' policy priorities. A belief network analysis was performed to identify the central and peripheral policy goals within coalitions. Coalitions brought together stakeholders with similar professional functions. Disagreements were observed between service managers and policymakers around policy goals. The two coalitions composed of policymakers supported a comprehensive approach that combines the different goals and also supported the shortening of hospital stays, whereas the two coalitions composed of service managers emphasised the personal recovery of users and continuity of care. Regardless of the coalitions' differing policy priorities, strengthening community care was a central goal while patient-centred goals were peripheral. The competing policy positions of the coalitions identified may explain the slow and inconsistent pace of the Belgian mental healthcare reform. Strengthening community care may be an essential part of reaching consensus across coalitions. Finally, special care must be taken to ensure that patient-centred policy goals, such as social integration, are not set aside in favour of other goals.

Indexed as

GoalsHealth Care ReformBelgiumHealth PolicyHumansAdvocacy coalitionsHealth care reformHealth policyMental healthStakeholders

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.