ArticleInternational journal of integrated care
Partners in Recovery: A Case Study of a National Support Coordination Program for People with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness.
Article in International journal of integrated care. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Partners in Recovery (PIR) was an Australian Commonwealth Government-funded program supporting 35,000 people with complex needs, who experienced severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI). The program was designed to foster integrated care to address fragmented and missing supports. Internationally it is a rare example of a national coordination program evaluated in multiple local contexts, from multiple stakeholder perspectives. This paper examines factors that contributed to the program's strengths and weaknesses, contextualising this in relation to the limits of subsequent supports. Methods: This case study draws together 30 program evaluation papers, identified through a range of search strategies. Utilising Arksey and O'Malley's review framework we collaboratively developed a synthesis of themes and findings. Results: The support facilitator role was essential to implementation as was organisational environment. As a cornerstone of care for people with SPMI, support coordination required Conclusions: Data from multiple evaluations of PIR demonstrate the importance of care coordination for SPMI which is underpinned by a recovery-oriented key worker, localised approaches and flexible funding. These are key attributes of integrated support which can inform practice and policy development for this group internationally.
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.