ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Introducing Peer-supported Open Dialogue in changing mental health care.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Transforming specialized mental health practice: Insights from clients' perspectives on how to support recovery.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Dignity in mental health care: the conceptual connections between sense of dignity, stigma and self-stigma among people with mental disorder diagnoses.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- A 36-Year-Old Black Male With Sickle Cell Disease and Coexisting Psychiatric Comorbidity: Utilizing Open Dialogue Practices to Overcome Stigma and Enhance Patient-Centered Care.Case reports in psychiatry · 2025Article
- How do dialogical group sessions work for mothers of young children with parenting challenges in Japan?International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2024Article
- Impact on mental health and well-being of the dialogic literary gathering among women in a primary healthcare centre.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2024Article
- Introducing Open Dialogue as part of the WHO QualityRights Project in South Korea: experiences and opinions from an introductory workshop and 1-year pilot practice.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- It is time for more holistic practices in mental health.PLOS mental health · 2024Article
- Open Dialogue in Spain: an initial survey of knowledge and perspectives.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Open Dialogue services around the world: a scoping survey exploring organizational characteristics in the implementation of the Open Dialogue approach in mental health services.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Unraveling complexity in changing mental health care towards person-centered care.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need to transform mental health care toward person-centered, recovery-based, and network-oriented care is recognized worldwide. Open Dialogue (OD) is seen as a hopeful approach in the context of this transformation and is introduced in countries around the globe. Five Dutch mental health care organizations spread over the Netherlands introduced the Peer-supported Open Dialogue (POD) approach, which adds an explicit role of peer-support workers to the OD approach. It appeared that (P)OD-trained professionals face issues in introducing the (P)OD approach in existing MHC settings. One of the reasons, which is the focus of this study, may be that they encounter difficulties in explaining to non-(P)OD-trained professionals what (P)OD entails. The main objective of this study is to provide guidance to and contribute to making (P)OD better understandable for non-(P)OD-trained professionals. In this study, we used a qualitative design and conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with POD-trained professionals with various backgrounds, to cultivate a rich understanding of which aspects could contribute to a better understanding of POD for non-POD-trained professionals. We used a hybrid approach to analyze the data, meaning that the technique of both inductive and deductive thematic analyses has been applied. From these analyses, six aspects emerged that could give guidance to and contribute to making (P)OD more understandable for non-(P)OD-trained professionals: (1) Experiencing (P)OD by attending treatment network sessions, (2) a coherent and profound narrative about (P)OD, (3) adjusting terminology to better fit the context, such as the two terms "principles" and "responsibility" in this study, (4) the order in which (P)OD elements are introduced in the narrative, (5) bringing the elements "presence," "reflecting," and "expertise by experience" more to the foreground, and (6) conceptualizing the main elements in a "talking paper." A better understanding of (P)OD might be one of the building blocks for improving (P)OD adoption in existing MHC practices, which are on their way toward person-centered, recovery-based, and network-oriented care.
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.