Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37247126›Full record

ReviewAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2024

Power to the people? A co-produced critical review of service user involvement in mental health professions education.

Csilla Kalocsai, Sacha Agrawal, Lee de Bie, Michaela Beder, Gail Bellissimo, Suze Berkhout, Andrew Johnson, Nancy McNaughton, Terri Rodak, Kim McCullough and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. What Do We Know About Sharing Power in Co-Production in Mental Health Research? A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

11 authors.

Csilla KalocsaiSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 2075 Bayview Avenue, Toronto, ON, M4N 3M5, Canada. csilla.kalocsai@sunnybrook.ca.
Sacha AgrawalDepartment of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lee de BieCentre for Clinical Ethics, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Michaela BederDepartment of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Gail BellissimoIndependent service user educator researcher, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Suze BerkhoutUniversity Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Andrew JohnsonCentre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Nancy McNaughtonWilson Centre for Research in Education at University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Terri RodakCentre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kim McCulloughDepartment of Social Work, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
Sophie SoklaridisDepartment of Psychiatry, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meaningful service user involvement in health professions education requires integrating knowledge held by "lay" people affected by health challenges into professional theories and practices. Involving service users redefines whose knowledge "counts" and implies a shift in power. Such a shift is especially significant in the mental health field, where power imbalances between health professionals and service users are magnified. However, reviews of the literature on service user involvement in mental health professional education do little to explore how power manifests in this work. Meanwhile critical and Mad studies scholars have highlighted that without real shifts in power, inclusion practices can lead to harmful consequences. We conducted a critical review to explore how power is addressed in the literature that describes service user involvement in mental health professions education. Our team used a co-produced approach and critical theories to identify how power implicitly and explicitly operates in this work to unearth the inequities and power structures that service user involvement may inadvertently perpetuate. We demonstrate that power permeates service user involvement in mental health professional education but is rarely made visible. We also argue that by missing the opportunity to locate power, the literature contributes to a series of epistemic injustices that reveal the contours of legitimate knowledge in mental health professions education and its neoliberal underpinnings. Ultimately, we call for a critical turn that foregrounds power relations to unlock the social justice-oriented transformative potential of service user involvement in mental health professions education and health professions education more broadly.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelPatient ParticipationEducational StatusHealth OccupationsHumansMental HealthCo-productionCritical literature reviewCritical theoriesHealth professional educationHealth professions education researchMental healthPatient and public involvementService user involvement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.