ArticlePLOS mental health2025
Exploring Open Dialogue and autism: A qualitative client-perspective study.
Article in PLOS mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Mental health care for people diagnosed with autism is transforming towards recovery-oriented, person-centered network care. Within this changing landscape, the Open Dialogue approach is acknowledged as a promising approach that exemplifies this transformation. Characterized by its transparent and equitable collaboration between client, their network and mental health care professionals, the Open Dialogue approach shows promise for people diagnosed with autism but also poses potential challenges, leaving uncertainty regarding its suitability. Given these potential benefits and challenges, the present study aims to explore how clients diagnosed with autism experience the Open Dialogue approach firsthand. This qualitative study explores how 12 participants diagnosed with autism experienced the OD approach at a specialized mental health care center for autism. The study employs six in-depth interviews and two focus groups, utilizing a hybrid analysis approach that combines both inductive and deductive thematic techniques. Findings reveal that participants generally have positive experiences with the Open Dialogue approach, highlighting key elements such as connectedness, reassurance, recognition, agency, and support through collaborative interaction. However, a minority reported negative experiences linked to feelings of uncertainty and discomfort with therapist reflections. These findings suggest that people diagnosed with autism evaluate the Open Dialogue approach in a similar way to other mental health service users. Despite the potential challenges posed by Open Dialogue, our results indicate that providing Open Dialogue care may be valuable for people diagnosed with autism, as it is for other mental health service users. Further research is needed to substantiate this indication.
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.