ArticleCommunity mental health journal2025
Intensive Outreach for Mental Health: Young People's Experiences of an Intensive Outreach Model on Recovery and Engagement.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovery colleges in youth mental health systems: developmentally adapted recovery-oriented learning environments.International journal of mental health systems · 2026Review
- Preliminary Study of the Effectiveness of the GUIA Assertive Community Treatment Program for the Care of Young, Highly Complex Mental Health Patients.Community mental health journal · 2026Observational
- Prevalence, type, and related factors of adverse childhood experiences among community mental health outreach users: A four-year retrospective cohort study.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Engagement with traditional mental health services can be particularly challenging for young people experiencing severe and complex mental health problems. Assertive community treatment-based services providing mobile outreach, such as Intensive Mobile Youth Outreach Services (IMYOS), operate across Australia to support these young people's mental health needs in the transition to adulthood. Past research on IMYOS has focused on quantitative outcome measures, and young people's experiences of this type of model are poorly understood. This study explored youth service users' experiences of an IMYOS program, focusing on the model and intervention aspects perceived as barriers and facilitators to their overall recovery and service engagement. Semi-structured, in-depth interviewing was undertaken with nine young people aged 16-19 years (M = 17.61 years) who were current or recent service users of an IMYOS program in Melbourne, Australia. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Having a therapeutic space, clinicians' specialised expertise, use of an outreach and community-oriented approach, and care continuity and availability across settings were program aspects identified by young people as facilitating their recovery and service engagement. Program aspects perceived as barriers to recovery and engagement were clinical unsuitability and ineffectiveness of the program and interventions, and conflicts between personal autonomy and assertive care. Young people's perceptions of clinical suitability and therapeutic relevance influenced their evaluations of the overall effectiveness of the IMYOS service, which subsequently impacted their engagement. The findings provide opportunities for IMYOS clinicians to enhance young people's recovery and engagement outcomes and have implications for the improvement of this innovative service for at-risk young people.
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.