SynthesisFrontiers in public health2025
A systematic review of the barriers and facilitators to lived experience involvement in mental health services.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 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.
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
Introduction: Individuals with lived experience of mental health conditions provide a unique perspective to mental health services. In this systematic review, a broad definition of 'involvement in mental health services' was used, which included peer support, peer mentors, and peer specialists. This review aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators reported to peer involvement in mental health services, to develop an understanding of the impact on the 'peer' and mental health care. Method: Five bibliographic databases were systematically searched (inception to May 2024) for qualitative studies, to identify the barriers and facilitators of peer involvement in mental health services. Data were analysed using the COM-B (capabilities, opportunities, motivation, and behaviour) model and Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to provide a theoretical framework for understanding the behaviour of being involved in mental health services. Results: The thirty-three studies included in this review provided data across all components of the COM-B model and eleven of the TDF domains. Barriers included the wider staff teams' lack of knowledge about the peer role, which impacted the peers' capability to be involved. The conflict between the professional peer role and identity impacted peers' motivation, positively and negatively, to remain involved. A lack of social support led to peers feeling stigmatised and excluded from the wider team. When peers felt supported, they could use their skills and lived experience knowledge to drive change in the system. Discussion/conclusion: This review provides insight into the barriers and facilitating factors experienced by individuals in peer involvement roles within mental health services. The wider implications challenge the notion that peer involvement reduces stigma and discrimination. This review highlights that peer involvement can sometimes increase peers' experience of stigmatisation, specifically when involved in mental health services.
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.