Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38477978›Full record

ArticleInteractive journal of medical research2024

A Web-Based Tool to Assess Social Inclusion and Support Care Planning in Mental Health Supported Accommodation: Development and Preliminary Test Study.

Sharon Eager, Helen Killaspy, Joanna C, Gillian Mezey, Peter McPherson, Megan Downey, Georgina Thompson, Brynmor Lloyd-Evans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interactive journal of medical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Sharon EagerDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4621-2645
Helen KillaspyDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2481-4802
Joanna CDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-5191-8521
Gillian MezeyPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9741-4773
Peter McPhersonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0998-9137
Megan DowneyCamden and Islington NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-6051-0007
Georgina ThompsonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1092-3955
Brynmor Lloyd-EvansDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9866-788X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndividuals with severe mental illness living in supported accommodation are often socially excluded. Social inclusion is an important aspect of recovery-based practice and quality of life. The Social Inclusion Questionnaire User Experience (SInQUE) is a measure of social inclusion that has been validated for use with people with mental health problems. Previous research has suggested that the SInQUE could also help support care planning focused on enabling social inclusion in routine mental health practice.

objectiveThis study aims to develop a web-based version of the SInQUE for use in mental health supported accommodation services, examine its acceptability and perceived usefulness as a tool to support care planning with service users, determine the extent of uptake of the tool in supported accommodation settings, and develop a program theory and logic model for the online SInQUE.

methodsThis study involved a laboratory-testing stage to assess the acceptability of the SInQUE tool through "think-aloud" testing with 6 supported accommodation staff members and a field-testing stage to assess the acceptability, utility, and use of the SInQUE tool over a 5-month period. An implementation strategy was used in 1 London borough to encourage the use of the SInQUE. Qualitative interviews with 12 service users and 12 staff members who used the tool were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. The use of the SInQUE was compared with that in 2 other local authority areas, 1 urban and 1 rural, where the tool was made available for use but no implementation strategy was used.

resultsOverall, 17 staff members used the SInQUE with 28 different service users during the implementation period (approximately 10% of all service users living in supported accommodation in the study area). The staff and service users interviewed felt that the SInQUE was collaborative, comprehensive, user-friendly, and relevant. Although some staff were concerned that particular questions might be too personal, service users did not echo this view. Participants generally felt that the SInQUE could help identify individuals' priorities regarding different aspects of social inclusion by prompting in-depth conversations and tailoring specific support to address service users' inclusion goals. Some interviewees also suggested that the tool could highlight areas of unmet or unmeetable needs across the borough that could feed into service planning. The SInQUE was not used in the comparison areas that had no implementation strategy.

conclusionsThe online SInQUE is an acceptable and potentially useful tool that can be recommended to assess and support care planning to enable social inclusion of people living in mental health supported accommodation services. Despite this, uptake rates were modest during the study period. A concerted implementation strategy is key to embedding its use in usual care, including proactive endorsement by senior leaders and service managers.

Indexed as

care planningdigital healthmental healthsocial inclusionsupported accommodation

Identifiers

PMID38477978
PMCPMC10973961

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.