Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34207855›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Offender Recovery. Forensic Patient Perspectives on Long-Term Personal Recovery Processes.

Jette Møllerhøj

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. I'm Not That Person: A Qualitative Study of Moral Injury in Forensic Psychiatric Patients.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Jette MøllerhøjCompetence Centre for Forensic Psychiatry, Mental Health Centre Sct. Hans, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3012-6221

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowledge on user experiences from mentally disordered offenders (MDOs) is still limited in a Danish context, especially regarding recovery from offences, severe mental illness, long-term admissions and often involuntarily contact with hospital psychiatry. The study is based on 34 semi-structured interviews with nine forensic patients exploring their experiences with personal recovery processes. The MDOs point out a significant number of elements and factors enhancing, supporting and limiting personal recovery processes. Long-term recovery processes for MDOs involve coming to terms with mental disorders as well as offences. Working with offender recovery implies addressing and understanding the index offence leading to psychiatric measurement as well as addressing risk and prevention of future crime. This coming to terms is an individual and deeply personal process and it often involves several and changing narratives. According to the informants, professionals play a crucial role in supporting recovery processes and maintaining hope and optimism over time. MDOs experience structural barriers limiting recovery potential, especially stigma or limited areas of participation. It is important not to focus solely on personal recovery as a one-dimensional individual process or responsibility, but as a process also marked by structural and organisational challenges.

Indexed as

CriminalsMental DisordersCrimeForensic MedicineForensic PsychiatryHumansapproachesmentally disordered offendersoffender recoveryrecovery processesroles of professionalsstigmavalues

Identifiers

PMID34207855
PMCPMC8296032

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.