Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35107439›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2022

Perceived Acceptability and Experiences of a Digital Psychoeducation and Peer Support Intervention (COPe-support): Interview Study With Carers Supporting Individuals With Psychosis.

Rachel Batchelor, Sarah Gulshan, Halpana Shritharan, Elen Williams, Claire Henderson, Steve Gillard, Luke A Woodham, Victoria Cornelius, Jack Elkes, Jacqueline Sin

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Operationalising a Recovery-Oriented Support and Information Programme Online: The EOLAS Programme.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel BatchelorPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0426-2388
Sarah GulshanSchool of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7519-7686
Halpana ShritharanSchool of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2213-1736
Elen WilliamsLocum GP, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7745-6696
Claire HendersonInstitute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6998-5659
Steve GillardSchool of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9686-2232
Luke A WoodhamCentre for Technology in Education, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4170-2925
Victoria CorneliusImperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0080-1065
Jack ElkesImperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4060-2394
Jacqueline SinSchool of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0590-7165
City, University of London · GBImperial College London · GBSt George's, University of London · GBUniversity of Reading · GBKing's College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2015-08-035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWeb-based mental health interventions offer a novel, accessible, and self-paced approach to care delivery to family carers (ie, relatives and close friends who support a loved one with psychosis). We coproduced COPe-support (Carers fOr People with Psychosis e-support), a psychoeducational intervention delivered via an enriched web-based learning environment with network support from professionals and peers. In addition to the rigorous investigation of the effectiveness of COPe-support on the well-being of carers and mental health outcomes, it is imperative to understand the experiences of using the web-based intervention by carers and its associated web-based implementation and facilitation strategies.

objectiveThis study aims to explore the experiences of carers and perceived acceptability of COPe-support and its different components, how carers found engagement with COPe-support affected their own well-being and caregiving, and the ideas of carers for improving COPe-support and its delivery to inform any future wider implementation.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative study, individually interviewing 35 carers, following their use of COPe-support for 8 months through a web-based, randomized controlled trial across England. A semistructured guide with open-ended questions was used to explore the experiences of carers and perceived acceptability of the intervention and their ideas to improve the provision. All interviews were conducted remotely through mobile phones or internet communication media, audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. We used a thematic analysis framework to analyze the data.

resultsThree key themes were identified: remote, flexible, and personalized support; impacts on well-being and outlook on caregiving; and future implementation and integration with existing services. Overall, carers found COPe-support a flexible source of knowledge and support from professionals and peers that they could personalize to suit their own needs and convenience. Participants described gaining self-confidence, hope, and a sense of connectivity with others in a similar situation, which helped ameliorate isolation and perceived stigma. Most importantly, COPe-support promoted self-care among the carers themselves. Participants' experiences, use, and activity on COPe-support varied greatly and differed among carers of various ages and levels of computer literacy.

conclusionsNearly all participants had a positive experience with COPe-support and supported its wider implementation as a beneficial adjunctive support resource for carers in the future. Any future scale-up of such an intervention needs to consider feedback from carers and suggestions for further improvement. These included having more graphics and audiovisual content materials, improving the navigation, and building in more interactional and customization options to suit various user styles, such as emoji reactions, live web-based chat, opting in and out of updates, and choosing the frequency of reminders. To ensure successful implementation, we should also consider factors pertinent to reaching more carers and integrating the web-based resources with other conventional services.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 89563420; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN89563420. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12888-020-02528-w.

Indexed as

CaregiversPsychotic DisordersAdaptation, PsychologicalHumansPeer GroupQualitative ResearcheHealthfamily carersmobile phonepeer supportpsychosisqualitative researchweb-based psychoeducation

Identifiers

PMID35107439
PMCPMC8851336
OpenAlexW3214881547

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.