ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2026
[Peer support in acute outreach psychiatric crisis interventions: results of a qualitative study].
Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2026. 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.
- Service users' perspectives on acute, outreach and outpatient psychiatric crisis interventions with and without peer support: results of a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPeer support workers (PSWs) possess personal experiences of psychiatric crises and can support individuals in their mental health recovery. The aim of this study was to examine the involvement of PSWs in acute, outreach psychiatric crisis interventions by the Crisis Intervention Service (CIS) Bremen from the perspective of the involved actors.
methodsAs part of the "PeerIntervent" study conducted between April 2023 and April 2024, five semi-structured interviews with three deployed PSWs and two focus groups with nine CIS staff members were conducted. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis according to Kuckartz, employing a category system developed both deductively and inductively. The COREQ checklist was followed.
resultsPSWs reported improved access to patients due to their experiential knowledge. CIS staff were initially skeptical about the use of PSWs in crisis contexts, resulting in PSWs being deployed primarily outside of acute crises, where they were perceived as relieving. Key prerequisites for successful integration in crisis settings were not fully met. DISCUSSION: Clear support from team leadership, transparent role definitions, and training and supervision are crucial for successful collaboration in acute crisis interventions. Careful and context-sensitive implementation is necessary. Further research should clarify how greater experience, clear role definitions, and longer onboarding periods could enhance collaboration.
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.