ArticleCommunity mental health journal2024
Perspectives and Experiences of Stakeholders on Self-Disclosure of Peers in Mental Health Services.
Article in Community mental health journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of the barriers and facilitators to lived experience involvement in mental health services.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Developing a trauma-informed peer support framework for young adults (TIPS-YA): Building on lessons from the field.Psychiatric rehabilitation journal · 2026Article
- Peer mentorship for physically injured veterans in healthcare settings during ongoing military conflict: benefits and barriers.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Peer-supported Open Dialogue: a qualitative study of peer practitioners' experiences and non-peer practitioners' perspectives on peer involvement.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- Facing the paradox of professionalizing peer roles in MH services: how addressing self-disclosure with self-determination theory might help.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the movement towards recovery-oriented mental health (MH) services, individuals with MH lived-experience are increasingly employed as peer providers (peers). Peers are unique in that they bring knowledge from experience and eye-level connection to service users that enhance the quality of services and humanize MH systems' culture. In Israel, hundreds of peers are employed in various roles and settings across the MH system. However, peer integration into MH services faces challenges. One issue involves the use of self-disclosure (SD) in MH services which varies with explicitness across roles and settings. This study sought to understand perspectives and experiences regarding peers' SD (use & sharing of knowledge from experience) among different stakeholders in MH health services. Six focus groups and 4 semi-structured interviews (N = 42) were conducted as a part of a larger international project (UPSIDES; ERC Horizon 2020, Moran et al., Trials 21:371, 2020). Data was transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis. Four categories and 7 themes were identified regarding current perspectives and experiences with peers' SD in MH organizations: (i) Restrained or cautious organizational approach to SD; (ii) Attitudes of peers to SD approach; (iii) The influence of designated peer roles on SD; and (iv) Unwarranted SD of peers working in traditional roles. The findings reveal that peers' SD in MH services is a complex process. Organizational approaches were often controlling of non-designated peers' SD practices; participants had diverse attitudes for and against peers' SD; SD occurred according to personal preferences, specific peer role and the director's approach to peers' SD; Conflictual SD dilemmas emerged in relation to service users and staff. SD sometimes occurs unwarrantely due to ill mental health. The presence of peer-designated roles positively impacts peers' SD. We interpret the current mix of views and general conduct of peer SD practice in statutory MH services as related to three aspects: 1. The presence of a traditional therapeutic SD model vs. a peer SD model - with the former currently being dominant. 2. Insufficient proficiency and skill development in peers' SD. 3. Stigmatic notions about peer SD among service users and staff. Together, these aspects interrelate and sometimes create a negative cycle create tension and confusion.A need to develop professionalism of peer SD in statutory services is highlighted alongside enhancing staff and service user acknowledgement of the value of peer SD. Developing peer-designated roles can positively impacts peer SD in MH statutory services. Training, support, and organizational interventions are required to further support for peer-oriented SD and the enhancement of a person-centered and recovery orientation of MH services.
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.