Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39656388›Full record

ArticleCommunity mental health journal2025

In Pursuit of Recovery: A Comparative Study of Stakeholder Perspectives on Outcomes of People with Psychosis.

Violet van Dee, Wilma Swildens, Hugo G Schnack, Wiepke Cahn

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Community mental health journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Violet van DeeBrain Center, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3508, Utrecht, GA, The Netherlands. v.vandee@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-7194-7021
Wilma SwildensAltrecht Institution for Mental Health Care, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3910-8767
Hugo G SchnackBrain Center, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3508, Utrecht, GA, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4620-3853
Wiepke CahnBrain Center, Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3508, Utrecht, GA, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0482-8759

Funding

ZonMw project ID 63631 0011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is no consensus on the definition of recovery of people with psychosis. This may be attributed to the broad concept including clinical, functional and personal recovery domains and the diverse interests of stakeholders involved. We hypothesized that service users, informal caregivers and healthcare professionals would exhibit differences in prioritization, reflecting varying roles and viewpoints. Through an open online anonymous questionnaire, stakeholders shared their perspectives on most important aspects of clinical, functional and personal recovery and on facilitators and barriers of recovery. Stakeholder collaboration in study design and interpretation enhanced the study's robustness. The answers on open questions of respondents were categorized for statistical analyses to compare the answers between respondent groups on the different aspects of recovery. 226 stakeholders participated. While commonalities prevailed, distinctions emerged in recovery domain priorities. Service users and informal caregivers accorded equal importance to clinical, functional and personal recovery, whereas healthcare professionals emphasized clinical recovery. Regarding functional recovery, service users seemed to focus on practical issues while informal caregivers addressed the underlying causes. Disparities were notable in the role of healthcare that was considered as both a facilitator or a barrier to recovery, with informal caregivers prioritizing aspects of healthcare more frequently as most important than healthcare professionals. While commonalities prevailed, we identified several differences in prioritizing recovery domains among stakeholder groups. Awareness and understanding of these differences is crucial for effective communication and collaboration between stakeholders in recovery-oriented healthcare. The study underscores the need for ongoing dialogue between stakeholders.

Indexed as

Mental Health RecoveryPsychotic DisordersAdultCommunity NetworksFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatientsSocial InteractionSurveys and QuestionnairesHealthcare professionalsInformal caregiversRecovery-oriented careSchizophreniaService users

Identifiers

PMID39656388
PMCPMC11772473

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.