ArticleBMC health services research2024
Perspectives of key informants before and after implementing UPSIDES peer support in mental health services: qualitative findings from an international multi-site study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation of peer support for people with severe mental health conditions in high-, middle- and low-income-countries: a theory of change approach.BMC health services research · 2024Trial
- Multicultural Implementation-Experiences of Peer Support Workers in MH Services: Qualitative Findings of UPSIDES Innovative Intervention-An International Multi-Site Project.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Voices from the territory and living care networks: facilitators and barriers to implementing peer support in community mental health services in Brazil.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Co-production using Theory of Change in the development of the SUCCEED Africa community-based rehabilitation intervention for people living with psychosis in West and Southeast Africa.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Changes in attitudes of mental health care staff surrounding the implementation of peer support work: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Towards a Scope of Practice for Peer Support Workers in Addictions: A Community-Based Study Using Qualitative Description.Global qualitative nursing researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 8 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeer support is an essential part of recovery-oriented care worldwide. Contextual factors have an impact on the implementation of peer support work. However, research has paid little attention to similarities and differences of implementation factors in settings varying by income-level and cultural values. The aim of this study is to assess the factors influencing the implementation of a peer support intervention across study sites in low-, middle- and high-income countries in line with the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).
method6 focus groups with a total of 54 key informants with relevant contextual (organisational) knowledge regarding implementation facilitators and barriers were conducted at six study sites Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel), and Pune (India) before and 1.5 years after the start of UPSIDES peer support. Transcripts were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
resultsAcross study sites key informants reported benefits of peer support for service users and peer support workers as implementation facilitators. At study sites with lower resources, reduced workload for mental health workers and improved access to mental health services through peer support were perceived as implementation facilitators (CFIR Domain 1: Intervention characteristics). The degree of engagement of mental health workers (CFIR Domain 3: Inner Setting/Domain 4: Individuals involved) varied across study sites and was seen either as a barrier (low engagement) or a facilitator (high engagement). Across study sites, adequate training of peer support workers (CFIR Domain 5: Implementation process) was seen as animplementation facilitator, while COVID-19 as well as low resource availability were reported as implementation barriers (CFIR Domain 2: Outer setting).
conclusionsThis study highlights the importance of considering contextual factors when implementing peer support, including previous experience and perceived benefits. Particular attention should be given to organisational benefits such as workload reduction and the allocation of sufficient resources as key drivers in LMICs. In HICs, the potential of organisational benefits for successful implementation should be further investigated and promoted.
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.