ArticleCommunity mental health journal2025
A Participatory Survey to Investigate the Long-Term Effectiveness of Adult Psychiatric Services (PSILEAPS): Baseline Data and Recruitment Experiences.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- After the Open Dialogue: a Within-Area Comparison of Treatment, Experiences, and Outcomes in Western Lapland 20 Years after Service Fragmentation.Community mental health journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In clinical psychology and psychiatry, traditional hypothesis testing is challenging due to the subjective and contextual nature of the studied phenomenon. To address this, more exploratory and participatory research is needed. This paper reports recruitment experiences and baseline data of a prospective exploratory cohort study with participatory elements, initiated in mental health services in one Finnish region. The primary aims, design, and survey for data collection were developed through community meetings involving local mental health workers, peer experts, and service users. Over 2 weeks, all mental health service users, their care teams, and social network members were asked to share their views on the reasons for needing services and what aspects of treatment have been or could be helpful or unhelpful. Descriptive statistics summarized baseline data, and simple thematic analysis examined field notes on supporting and hindering aspects of the study design. A total of 117 service users, 54 care team members, and 34 social network members participated, with a service user attrition rate of 40-50%. The study achieved 79% of the target sample size. Women and participants with mood disorder diagnoses and long-term service usage were overrepresented. Findings suggest that integrating participatory research into Finnish public mental health services would require additional resources. Despite its limitations, the collected data will facilitate exploratory research into real-life mental health treatment processes from various perspectives.
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.