Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38214639›Full record

ArticleWorld psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA)2024

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of online recorded recovery narratives in improving quality of life for people with non-psychotic mental health problems: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.

Mike Slade, Stefan Rennick-Egglestone, Rachel A Elliott, Chris Newby, Clare Robinson, Sean P Gavan, Luke Paterson, Yasmin Ali, Caroline Yeo, Tony Glover and 23 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
22.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Digital narratology for people with psychosis experience.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

33 authors at 17 institutions in 6 countries.

Mike SladeSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Stefan Rennick-EgglestoneSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Rachel A ElliottManchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Chris NewbySchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Clare RobinsonCentre for Evaluation and Methods, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Sean P GavanManchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Luke PatersonManchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Yasmin AliSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Caroline YeoSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Tony GloverDRT Software, Nottingham, UK.
Kristian PollockSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Felicity CallardSchool of Geographical & Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Stefan PriebeUnit for Social and Community Psychiatry, East London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Graham ThornicroftCentre for Implementation Science and Centre for Global Mental Health, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Julie RepperImROC, Nottingham, UK.
Jeroen KeppensDepartment of Informatics, King's College London, London, UK.
Melanie SmukCentre for Genomics and Child Health, Blizard Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Donna FranklinNEON Lived Experience Advisory Panel, Nottingham, UK.
Rianna WalcottBlack Communication and Technology Lab, Department of Communication, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
Julian HarrisonNEON Lived Experience Advisory Panel, Nottingham, UK.
Roger SmithNEON Lived Experience Advisory Panel, Nottingham, UK.
Dan RobothamMcPin Foundation, London, UK.
Simon BradstreetInstitute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Steve GillardSchool of Health Sciences, City, University of London, London, UK.
Pim CuijpersDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marianne FarkasCenter for Psychiatric Rehabilitation, College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Dror Ben ZeevSchool of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Larry DavidsonYale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Yasuhiro KoteraSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
James RoeNational Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration East Midlands, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Fiona NgSchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Joy Llewellyn-BeardsleySchool of Health Sciences, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
NEON study group
University of Nottingham · GBInstitute of Mental Health · GBKing's College London · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBBoston University · USCity, University of London · GBEast London NHS Foundation Trust · GBInternational Mining Consultants · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBMcPin Foundation · GBNottingham Biomedical Research Centre · GBUniversity of Maryland, College Park · USUniversity of Washington · USVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLYale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Medical Research Council MR/S001255/1NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Narratives describing first-hand experiences of recovery from mental health problems are widely available. Emerging evidence suggests that engaging with mental health recovery narratives can benefit people experiencing mental health problems, but no randomized controlled trial has been conducted as yet. We developed the Narrative Experiences Online (NEON) Intervention, a web application providing self-guided and recommender systems access to a collection of recorded mental health recovery narratives (n=659). We investigated whether NEON Intervention access benefited adults experiencing non-psychotic mental health problems by conducting a pragmatic parallel-group randomized trial, with usual care as control condition. The primary endpoint was quality of life at week 52 assessed by the Manchester Short Assessment (MANSA). Secondary outcomes were psychological distress, hope, self-efficacy, and meaning in life at week 52. Between March 9, 2020 and March 26, 2021, we recruited 1,023 participants from across England (the target based on power analysis was 994), of whom 827 (80.8%) identified as White British, 811 (79.3%) were female, 586 (57.3%) were employed, and 272 (26.6%) were unemployed. Their mean age was 38.4±13.6 years. Mood and/or anxiety disorders (N=626, 61.2%) and stress-related disorders (N=152, 14.9%) were the most common mental health problems. At week 52, our intention-to-treat analysis found a significant baseline-adjusted difference of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.01-0.26, p=0.041) in the MANSA score between the intervention and control groups, corresponding to a mean change of 1.56 scale points per participant, which indicates that the intervention increased quality of life. We also detected a significant baseline-adjusted difference of 0.22 (95% CI: 0.05-0.40, p=0.014) between the groups in the score on the "presence of meaning" subscale of the Meaning in Life Questionnaire, corresponding to a mean change of 1.1 scale points per participant. We found an incremental gain of 0.0142 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (95% credible interval: 0.0059 to 0.0226) and a £178 incremental increase in cost (95% credible interval: -£154 to £455) per participant, generating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £12,526 per QALY compared with usual care. This was lower than the £20,000 per QALY threshold used by the National Health Service in England, indicating that the intervention would be a cost-effective use of health service resources. In the subgroup analysis including participants who had used specialist mental health services at baseline, the intervention both reduced cost (-£98, 95% credible interval: -£606 to £309) and improved QALYs (0.0165, 95% credible interval: 0.0057 to 0.0273) per participant as compared to usual care. We conclude that the NEON Intervention is an effective and cost-effective new intervention for people experiencing non-psychotic mental health problems.

Indexed as

digital health interventionlived experience narrativemeaning in lifeNEON Interventionnon-psychotic mental health problemsquality of liferecovery narrative

Identifiers

PMID38214639
PMCPMC10785987
OpenAlexW4390794651

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.