Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39051360›Full record

ArticleNursing reports (Pavia, Italy)2024

Evaluation of the Perceived Benefits of a Peer Support Group for People with Mental Health Problems.

David Beard, Charlie Cottam, Jon Painter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy), 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Chronic Pain in Community: A Mixed Methods Evaluation of the Vet-to-Vet Program.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

3 authors.

David BeardDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S10 2BP, UK.
Charlie CottamDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S10 2BP, UK.
Jon PainterDepartment of Nursing and Midwifery, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield S10 2BP, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1589-4054

Funding

PeerTalk N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper reports on a service evaluation of PeerTalk, a nationwide charity that organises and facilitates peer support groups for individuals with depression. Therefore, the aim was to gather and synthesise benefits perceived by support group attendees. Thematic analysis was undertaken following the collection of data from two group interviews comprising PeerTalk support group attendees. Once those data were analysed, five key themes emerged: (1) talking/listening, (2) socialising, (3) contrast with other services, (4) personal benefits, and (5) structure and accessibility. Two further minor themes were also identified: (6) wider benefits and (7) areas for development that could lead to overall improvements to the service. PeerTalk's support groups provide multiple opportunities for attendees to meet others who have similar experiences within an environment that does not require formal engagement or commitment. Those that attend find benefit from supporting others and socialising within the group. These benefits are complementary to mainstream services that they may concurrently be involved with, rather than replacing or hindering them. Peer support groups can therefore provide a resource for healthcare professionals to which they can direct individuals who may feel benefit from engaging with other individuals with similar experiences. Sheffield Hallam University granted ethics approval for the study (ER:59716880) prior to its commencement (16 February 2024).

Indexed as

depressiongrouppeer supportservice evaluation

Identifiers

PMID39051360
PMCPMC11270277

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.