Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39314142›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2024

Let's talk about recovery in mental health: an international Delphi study of experts by experience.

E Guerrero, M Barrios, H M Sampietro, A Aza, J Gómez-Benito, G Guilera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors.

E GuerreroDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1433-0532
M BarriosDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona, Spain.
H M SampietroDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, University of Barcelona, Spain.
A AzaDepartment of Personality, Evaluation and Psychological Treatments, University of Salamanca, Spain.
J Gómez-BenitoDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona, Spain.
G GuileraDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Psychology, Institute of Neurosciences, University of Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe concept of recovery is featured in the strategic plans of the World Health Organization as well as in other national mental health plans; however, there have been differing interpretations of what it means. This article aims to achieve a consensus on the key aspects of recovery in mental health from the perspective of movements of users and survivors of psychiatry at an international level. Four specific objectives were proposed in this study: (1) to identify what recovery in mental health means, (2) to identify the indicators that a person is progressing in their recovery, (3) to determine the factors that facilitate the recovery process, and (4) to determine the factors that hinder the recovery process.

methodsA three-round e-Delphi study was conducted with the participation of 101 users and survivors of psychiatry, adhering to the CREDES checklist to ensure methodological rigour.

resultsThe results reveal 26 key aspects that define recovery, 31 indicating that a person is progressing in their recovery process, 8 that facilitate recovery and 12 that hinder recovery. The most agreed-upon statements for defining recovery highlight the importance of empowerment, leading a fulfilling life, ensuring safe-living conditions and acknowledging individuals as holders of rights. Similarly, empowerment and agency were highly agreed upon as relevant recovery indicators. Key findings underscore the significance of a supportive and respectful social environment in facilitating recovery, while coercion, discrimination and lack of support from significant others hinder recovery.

conclusionsDespite cultural differences and recovery's subjective nature, our results demonstrate that an international consensus on critical recovery aspects is attainable. Highlighting a significant shift, we emphasize the 'Transition' process to signify moving away from the biomedical model approach and advocating for collective rights. Our findings advocate for empowerment, users' rights and the move towards person-centred care that integrates social, political and economic contexts. These consensus statements lay the groundwork for future research across diverse regions and cultures, offering insights into recovery's meaning and potential for innovative approaches in diagnosis, intervention and evaluation.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueMental DisordersMental HealthAdultConsensusEmpowermentFemaleHumansMaleMental Health RecoveryMental Health Servicesmental healthmodels/theories of psychiatrypsychiatric servicesrights of persons with disabilitiessocial and political issues

Identifiers

PMID39314142
PMCPMC11464929

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.