↓ Skip to main content

Transforming mental health services: a participatory mixed methods study to promote and evaluate the implementation of recovery-oriented services

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

3 tweeters
3 Facebook pages


21 Dimensions

Readers on

186 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Transforming mental health services: a participatory mixed methods study to promote and evaluate the implementation of recovery-oriented services
Published in
Implementation Science, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13012-014-0119-7
Pubmed ID

Melissa M Park, Hiba Zafran, Janet Stewart, Jon Salsberg, Carolyn Ells, Suzanne Rouleau, Orly Estein, Thomas W Valente


BackgroundSince 2007, the Mental Health Commission of Canada has worked collaboratively across all provinces to publish a framework and strategy for recovery and well-being. This federal document is now mandated as policy for implementation between 2012 and 2017. The proposed strategies have been written into provincial health plans, hospital accreditation standards, and annual objectives of psychiatric departments and community organizations. The core premise is: to empower persons with mental illness and their families to become participants in designing their own care, while meeting the needs of a diverse Canadian population. However, recovery principles do not come with an implementation guide to fit the variability of different local contexts. How can policy recommendations and accreditation standards be effectively tailored to support a diversity of stakeholder values? To our knowledge, there is little evidence indicating the most effective manner to accelerate the uptake of recovery-oriented services among providers in a given/particular mental health treatment setting.Methods/DesignThis three-year Canadian Institute of Health Research Partnership in Health System Improvement and The Rx&D Health Research Foundation (HRF) Fostering Canadian Innovation in Research study (2013 to 2017) proposed participatory approaches to implementing recovery principles in a department of psychiatry serving a highly diverse Canadian and immigrant population. This project will be conducted in overlapping and recursive phases: I) Conduct formative research to (a) measure the current knowledge and attitudes toward recovery and recovery-oriented practices among service providers, while concurrently (b) exploring the experiential knowledge of recovery of service-users and family members; II) Collaborate with service-users and the network-identified opinion leaders among providers to tailor Recovery-in-Action Initiatives to fit the needs and resources of a Department of Psychiatry; and III) Conduct a systematic theory-based evaluation of changes in attitudes and practices within the service-user/service-provider partnership group relative to the overall provider network of the department and identify the barriers and supports within the local context.DiscussionOur anticipated outcome is a participatory toolkit to tailor recovery-oriented services, which will be disseminated to the Mental Health Commission of Canada and Accreditation Canada at the federal level, agencies at the provincial levels, and local end-of-knowledge users.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 182 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 17%
Researcher 30 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Other 37 20%
Unknown 26 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 36 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 16%
Psychology 27 15%
Arts and Humanities 6 3%
Other 26 14%
Unknown 33 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 July 2015.
All research outputs
of 5,407,579 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
of 887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 139,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,407,579 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 59th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 139,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.