ArticleBMC psychiatry2022
Peer supported Open Dialogue in the National Health Service: implementing and evaluating a new approach to Mental Health Care.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supported Decision-Making Interventions in Mental Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Evidence on the Outcomes for People With Mental Ill Health.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of psychological interventions for carers of patients with severe mental illness (SMI): a systematic review.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Everyone Breathes: a mixed methods evaluation of a combined Feldenkrais and vocal improvisation group within an adult mental health Recovery College setting.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Listening to Worries: A Phenomenological Inquiry Into Open Dialogue in Community Settings.Cureus · 2025Article
- Collaborative Practices in Mental Health Care: A Concept Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Enhancing social cognition in psychosis - the potential role of open dialogue.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Psychoeducation for Relatives of Young Adults with First-Episode Psychosis: A Qualitative Exploration of Needs and Experiences.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Assessing the quality of life of schizophrenia patients and their family caregivers in a Romanian sample: the role of clinical, sociocultural, and demographic factors.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating Open Dialogue in Italian mental health services: evidence from a multisite prospective cohort study.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Feasibility of an Open Dialogue-Inspired Approach for Young Adults with Psychosis in a Public Hospital System.Community mental health journal · 2023Article
- The introduction and implementation of open dialogue in a day center in Athens, Greece: experiences and reflections of mental health professionals.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- The contribution of anthropology to the study of Open Dialogue: ethnographic research methods and opportunities.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
- Development of the peer-supported open dialogue attitude and competence inventory for practitioners: A Delphi study.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- "It has to be better, otherwise we will get stuck." A Review of Novel Directions for Mental Health Reform and Introducing Pilot Work in the Netherlands.Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH · 2023Review
- Conceptualizing the peer contribution in Open Dialogue practice.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOpen Dialogue is an internationally developing approach to mental health care based on collaboration between an individual and their family and social network. Our quest for better approaches to Mental Health Care with improved carer and service user experience led us to develop and test a model of Peer Supported Open Dialogue (POD). There is no research currently looking at the implementation and effectiveness of a standalone POD team in the NHS so we evaluate its implementation, clinical outcomes and value to service users and their families.
methodA before-after design was used. 50 service users treated by the POD Team were recruited and participants from their family and wider social network. Service user self report questionnaires covering wellbeing, functioning, satisfaction were collected and one carer self report measure; at baseline, three and six months. A clinician reported measure was collected at baseline and six months. Clinicians perceptions of practice were collected following network meetings.
results50 service users treated were recruited with a mean age of 35 years with slightly more males than females. Service users reported signficant improvements in wellbeing and functioning. There was a marked increase in perceived support by carers. Over half the meetings were attended by carers. The Community Mental Health Survey showed high satisfaction rates for service users including carer involvement.
conclusionsThe study indicated it was possible to transform to deliver a clinically effective POD service in the NHS. This innovative approach provided continuity of care within the social network, with improved carer support and significant improvements in clinical outcomes and their experiences.
trial registration( isrctn.com/ISRCTN36004039 . Retrospectively registered 04/01/2019.
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.