ArticleSchizophrenia bulletin open2025
Online Hearing Voices Peer Support Groups: Assessing Feasibility and Acceptability Within UK National Health Service Settings.
Article in Schizophrenia bulletin open, 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.
- 'It was like a little family': A qualitative study of online hearing voices peer support groups in the NHS.Psychology and psychotherapy · 2026Article
- A qualitative analysis of experiences in veteran voices and visions groups: developing a participant-informed model of connection, acceptance, and social integration.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Staff and voice hearer perspectives on Hearing Voices Groups in the NHS: a mixed-methods cross-sectional survey.Frontiers in psychology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: User-led hearing voices groups (HVGs) have existed for the past 40 years, but little research has been conducted into if and how this approach can be implemented in statutory mental health settings, and whether they can be delivered effectively when held online. The aim of this study was to conduct a feasibility and acceptability trial of an online HVG for the UK National Health Service (NHS) users who hear voices, to inform a future larger-scale trial. Methods: A mixed-methods, nonrandomized feasibility study of an online HVG was conducted with 9 participants. Participants attended weekly online meetings for 6 months and completed measures of social connectedness, voice hearing, personal recovery, as well as semi-structured interviews, at baseline and postintervention (26-weeks). Primary outcomes were qualitative and quantitative assessments of feasibility and acceptability. Results: Thirty-eight participants were referred to the trial, 9 of whom were recruited (100% of the target sample). The trial had high retention (100%) and engagement (mean = 13.2 groups attended). Participants reported positive features of attending this digital intervention, with 85% reporting it was helpful to meet other voice hearers, that the group helped them make sense of voice hearing experiences, that they received positive messages about recovery, and that the group represented a form of support they could not get elsewhere. Discussion: The findings indicate it is feasible and acceptable to run an online HVG within an NHS setting. A larger trial is needed to further investigate the utility, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of running online HVGs in the NHS. Trial Registration: ISRCTN11873550.
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.