| Title |
Randomised controlled trial of a digitally assisted low intensity intervention to promote personal recovery in persisting psychosis: SMART-Therapy study protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Psychiatry, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12888-016-1024-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Neil Thomas, John Farhall, Fiona Foley, Susan L. Rossell, David Castle, Emma Ladd, Denny Meyer, Cathrine Mihalopoulos, Nuwan Leitan, Cassy Nunan, Rosalie Frankish, Tara Smark, Sue Farnan, Bronte McLeod, Leon Sterling, Greg Murray, Ellie Fossey, Lisa Brophy, Michael Kyrios |
| Abstract |
Psychosocial interventions have an important role in promoting recovery in people with persisting psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia. Readily available, digital technology provides a means of developing therapeutic resources for use together by practitioners and mental health service users. As part of the Self-Management and Recovery Technology (SMART) research program, we have developed an online resource providing materials on illness self-management and personal recovery based on the Connectedness-Hope-Identity-Meaning-Empowerment (CHIME) framework. Content is communicated using videos featuring persons with lived experience of psychosis discussing how they have navigated issues in their own recovery. This was developed to be suitable for use on a tablet computer during sessions with a mental health worker to promote discussion about recovery. This is a rater-blinded randomised controlled trial comparing a low intensity recovery intervention of eight one-to-one face-to-face sessions with a mental health worker using the SMART website alongside routine care, versus an eight-session comparison condition, befriending. The recruitment target is 148 participants with a schizophrenia-related disorder or mood disorder with a history of psychosis, recruited from mental health services in Victoria, Australia. Following baseline assessment, participants are randomised to intervention, and complete follow up assessments at 3, 6 and 9 months post-baseline. The primary outcome is personal recovery measured using the Process of Recovery Questionnaire (QPR). Secondary outcomes include positive and negative symptoms assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, subjective experiences of psychosis, emotional symptoms, quality of life and resource use. Mechanisms of change via effects on self-stigma and self-efficacy will be examined. This protocol describes a novel intervention which tests new therapeutic methods including in-session tablet computer use and video-based peer modelling. It also informs a possible low intensity intervention model potentially viable for delivery across the mental health workforce. NCT02474524 , 24 May 2015, retrospectively registered during the recruitment phase. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 17% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 462 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 459 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 68 | 15% |
| Researcher | 47 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 43 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 38 | 8% |
| Other | 90 | 19% |
| Unknown | 130 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 110 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 57 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 31 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 11 | 2% |
| Other | 48 | 10% |
| Unknown | 153 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2019.
All research outputs
#3,289,164
of 25,260,058 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,283
of 5,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,622
of 343,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#19
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,260,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 343,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.