Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36289473›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2022

The processes involved in the establishment of user-provider partnerships in severe psychiatric illnesses: a scoping review.

Aletta Boerkoel, Mats Brommels

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Aletta BoerkoelInstitute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany. aletta.boerkoel@med.uni-greifswald.de.
Mats BrommelsDepartment for Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWith the rising relevance of person-centred care, initiatives towards user-led decision making and designing of care services have become more frequent. This designing of care services can be done in partnership, but it is unclear how. The aim of this scoping review was to identify for mental health services, what user-provider partnerships are, how they arise in practice and what can facilitate or hinder them.

methodsA scoping review was conducted to obtain a broad overview of user provider partnerships in severe mental illness. Data was inductively analysed using a conventional content analysis approach, in which meaning was found in the texts.

resultsIn total, 1559 titles were screened for the eligibility criteria and the resulting 22 papers found relevant were analysed using conventional content analysis. The identified papers had broad and differing concepts for user-provider partnerships. Papers considered shared decision making and user-involvement as partnerships. Mechanisms such as open communication, organisational top-down support and active participation supported partnerships, but professional identity, power imbalances and stress hindered them. Users can be impeded by their illness, but how to deal with these situations should be formalised through contracts.

conclusionThe field of research around user-provider partnerships is scattered and lacks consensus on terminology. A power imbalance between a user and a provider is characteristic of partnerships in mental healthcare, which hinders the necessary relationship building allowing partnerships to arise. This power imbalance seems to be closely linked to professional identity, which was found to be difficult to change.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersMental Health ServicesCommunicationDelivery of Health CareHumansHealth services researchPerson-centred carePsychiatryUser-led careUser-provider partnerships

Identifiers

PMID36289473
PMCPMC9608879

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.