↓ Skip to main content

‘We’re all in the same boat’: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis study of experiences of being an ‘expert’ during patient and public involvement within Child and Adolescent Mental Health…

Overview of attention for article published in Health Expectations, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
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.
Title
‘We’re all in the same boat’: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis study of experiences of being an ‘expert’ during patient and public involvement within Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS)
Published in
Health Expectations, February 2021
DOI 10.1111/hex.13183
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samiran Idrees, Samantha Hartley, Jasmine Heath Hearn

Abstract

Patient and Public involvement (PPI) has rapidly evolved into a key component in shaping the delivery of health services. However, little is known about what it is like to participate in involvement procedures that include representatives of multiple groups and in the context of developing new interventions for Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). This study explored participants' experiences of PPI, following attending a 'consensus conference', during which their views were sought in relation to the development of a proposed staff-based intervention and key questions about its design and implementation. Qualitative, semi-structured interview study. Six participants, including service users and various frontline clinical staff team members, who had experience of CAMHS were present at the consensus conference and then asked about their experiences of being involved via semi-structured interviews. The data were analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). Young people, carers and frontline staff have been involved in the design and implementation throughout the broader programme of work of which this study forms part, although these groups were not directly involved in the design and implementation of this paper. Three key narratives were present: (a) Previous Experiences Driving Expectations, (b) 'We are all in the same boat' and (c) The Realization of Multiple Identities. The results suggest that PPI involvement is a complex process that may be driven by positive/negative expectations, but that individuals value learning about others and recognizing different perspectives while reaching shared goals in improving services. This study demonstrates the complexity of experience that service users and clinical staff face when engaging in involvement activities in CAMHS. The findings demonstrate the value in engaging multiple stakeholder groups while also highlighting the importance of proper consideration of the procedures involved and facilitators of engagement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 21 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 17%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Unspecified 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 23 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 26 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,059,355
of 25,260,058 outputs
Outputs from Health Expectations
#282
of 1,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,402
of 521,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Expectations
#9
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,260,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 521,227 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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.