Suppr超能文献

开发一个用于评估康复学院影响的评估框架:参与式利益相关者参与过程和共同创建的范围审查方案

Developing an evaluation framework for assessing the impact of recovery colleges: protocol for a participatory stakeholder engagement process and cocreated scoping review.

作者信息

Lin Elizabeth, Harris Holly, Gruszecki Sam, Costa-Dookhan Kenya A, Rodak Terri, Sockalingam Sanjeev, Soklaridis Sophie

机构信息

Department of Education, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2022 Mar 21;12(3):e055289. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-055289.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Recovery colleges (RCs) are mental health centres aimed at equipping people with skills to live a meaningful life despite the presence of mental distress. Unique to them is the aspect of cocreation; RCs are designed collaboratively with people of lived experiences of mental health and addictions and care providers. Despite established benefits, there remains a lack of empirical evidence on how RCs work and on their impact.

AIMS

We aim to address this gap by designing a cocreated evaluation framework for RCs. This will be accomplished by engaging RC student/facilitators to provide perspectives on RCs/RC evaluation and cocreate a scoping review identifying evaluation gaps in the literature. Themes identified through these processes will form the evaluation framework.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Two methodologies will be used to explore RC evaluation: student/facilitator engagement and a scoping review of current published and grey literature on RC evaluation. Engagement will be achieved using a participatory action research approach consisting of informant interviews of ~25 RC students/facilitators across Canada, which will be thematically analysed. The scoping review will follow methodology described by Arksey and O'Malley modified to support cocreation. Concurrent conducting of the engagement process and scoping review will allow RC students and peer facilitators the opportunity to shape RC evaluations, address gaps in the literature and codesign an evaluation framework focused on recovery-oriented processes and outcomes mattering most to RCs students/facilitators.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was received for the RC student/facilitator engagement component from the Centre for Addictions and Mental Health Research Ethics Board (#042-2020) and Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences (#20-013-B). Scoping review results will be copresented through national and international medical education conferences and published in open-access peer-reviewed journals. Furthermore, a dissemination strategy on evaluation for the national RC community will be created.

摘要

引言

康复学院(RCs)是心理健康中心,旨在使人们具备相应技能,以便在存在精神困扰的情况下仍能过上有意义的生活。其独特之处在于共同创造这一方面;康复学院是与有心理健康和成瘾生活经历的人以及护理提供者合作设计的。尽管已证实其益处,但关于康复学院如何运作及其影响,仍缺乏实证证据。

目的

我们旨在通过为康复学院设计一个共同创造的评估框架来填补这一空白。这将通过让康复学院的学生/辅导员参与,以提供对康复学院/康复学院评估的看法,并共同开展一项范围界定审查来确定文献中的评估差距来实现。通过这些过程确定的主题将构成评估框架。

方法与分析

将使用两种方法来探索康复学院评估:学生/辅导员参与以及对当前已发表和灰色文献中有关康复学院评估的范围界定审查。参与将采用参与式行动研究方法,包括对加拿大各地约25名康复学院学生/辅导员进行信息提供者访谈,并进行主题分析。范围界定审查将遵循阿克西和奥马利描述的方法,并进行修改以支持共同创造。同时进行参与过程和范围界定审查将使康复学院学生和同伴辅导员有机会塑造康复学院评估、填补文献中的空白,并共同设计一个侧重于对康复学院学生/辅导员最重要的以康复为导向的过程和结果的评估框架。

伦理与传播

成瘾与心理健康研究伦理委员会(#042 - 2020)和安大略省湖滨心理健康科学中心(#20 - 013 - B)已批准了康复学院学生/辅导员参与部分的伦理审查。范围界定审查结果将通过国内和国际医学教育会议共同展示,并发表在开放获取的同行评审期刊上。此外,还将为全国康复学院社区制定一项评估传播策略。

相似文献

3
Evaluating recovery colleges: a co-created scoping review.
J Ment Health. 2023 Aug;32(4):813-834. doi: 10.1080/09638237.2022.2140788. Epub 2022 Nov 8.
4
Recovery-oriented social work practice in mental health and addictions: a scoping review protocol.
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 20;10(8):e037777. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037777.
5
Scoping review protocol: education initiatives for medical psychiatry collaborative care.
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 3;7(9):e015886. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015886.
7
Quality indicators for substance use disorder care: a scoping review protocol.
BMJ Open. 2025 Mar 29;15(3):e085216. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085216.
8
Social work education and training in mental health, addictions and suicide: a scoping review protocol.
BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 11;9(6):e024659. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024659.

引用本文的文献

1
State-of-the-art literature review of Recovery College evaluative studies between 2013-2024.
Front Psychiatry. 2025 Aug 4;16:1584110. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1584110. eCollection 2025.
2
Cultural influences on fidelity components in recovery colleges: a study across 28 countries and territories.
Gen Psychiatr. 2025 May 27;38(3):e102010. doi: 10.1136/gpsych-2024-102010. eCollection 2025.
3
28-country global study on associations between cultural characteristics and Recovery College fidelity.
Npj Ment Health Res. 2024 Oct 8;3(1):46. doi: 10.1038/s44184-024-00092-9.
5
A balancing act: navigating the nuances of co-production in mental health research.
Res Involv Engagem. 2024 Mar 7;10(1):30. doi: 10.1186/s40900-024-00561-7.
6
Recovery in Mind: A Recovery College's journey through the Covid-19 pandemic.
Health Expect. 2022 Dec;25(6):3274-3286. doi: 10.1111/hex.13635. Epub 2022 Oct 25.

本文引用的文献

1
Recovery Colleges After a Decade of Research: A Literature Review.
Psychiatr Serv. 2020 Sep 1;71(9):928-940. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201900352. Epub 2020 May 28.
3
Recovery colleges as a mental health innovation.
World Psychiatry. 2019 Jun;18(2):141-142. doi: 10.1002/wps.20620.
6
Mechanisms of Action and Outcomes for Students in Recovery Colleges.
Psychiatr Serv. 2018 Dec 1;69(12):1222-1229. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201800283. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
7
PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation.
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473. doi: 10.7326/M18-0850. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
8
Patient and family involvement in adult critical and intensive care settings: a scoping review.
Health Expect. 2016 Dec;19(6):1183-1202. doi: 10.1111/hex.12402. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
9
Conceptualization and Reporting of Context in the North American Continuing Medical Education Literature: A Scoping Review Protocol.
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2015 Fall;35 Suppl 2:S70-4. doi: 10.1097/CEH.0000000000000010.
10
Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power.
Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760. doi: 10.1177/1049732315617444. Epub 2016 Jul 10.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验