ArticleBMJ open2024
Mental health workers' perspectives on the implementation of a peer support intervention in five countries: qualitative findings from the UPSIDES study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world comprehensive care of people living with schizophrenia: recommendations across different settings and clinical stages.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026Article
- Experiences of service users receiving peer support in mental health services: Qualitative findings from the international UPSIDES trial.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Peer-supported Open Dialogue: a qualitative study of peer practitioners' experiences and non-peer practitioners' perspectives on peer involvement.BJPsych open · 2025Article
- A stress-reduction eHealth intervention for healthcare workers in primary care settings: an implementation study.Frontiers in public health · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe introduction of peer support in mental health teams creates opportunities and challenges for both peer and non-peer staff. However, the majority of research on mental health workers' (MHWs) experiences with peer support comes from high-income countries. Using Peer Support In Developing Empowering Mental Health Services (UPSIDES) is an international multicentre study, which aims at scaling up peer support for people with severe mental illness in Europe, Asia and Africa. This study investigates MHWs experiences with UPSIDES peer support.
designSix focus groups with MHWs were conducted approximately 18 months after the implementation of the UPSIDES peer support intervention. Transcripts were analysed with a descriptive approach using thematic content analysis.
settingQualitative data were collected in Ulm and Hamburg (Germany), Butabika (Uganda), Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Be'er Sheva (Israel) and Pune (India).
participants25 MHWs (19 females and 6 males) from UPSIDES study sites in the UPSIDES Trial (ISRCTN26008944) participated.
findingsFive overarching themes were identified in MHWs' discussions: MHWs valued peer support workers (PSWs) for sharing their lived experiences with service users (theme 1), gained trust in peer support over time (theme 2) and provided support to them (theme 3). Participants from lower-resource study sites reported additional benefits, including reduced workload. PSWs extending their roles beyond what MHWs perceived as appropriate was described as a challenge (theme 4). Perceptions about PSWs varied based on previous peer support experience, ranging from considering PSWs as equal team members to viewing them as service users (theme 5).
conclusionsConsidering local context is essential in order to understand MHWs' views on the cooperation with PSWs. Especially in settings with less prior experience of peer support, implementers should make extra effort to promote interaction between MHWs and PSWs. In order to better understand the determinants of successful implementation of peer support in diverse settings, further research should investigate the impact of contextual factors (eg, resource availability and cultural values). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26008944.
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.