Service User Representation in Qualitative Research on Cognitive Health and Related Interventions for Psychosis: A Scoping Review.

IF 5.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Lauren Gonzales, Nev Jones
{"title":"Service User Representation in Qualitative Research on Cognitive Health and Related Interventions for Psychosis: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Lauren Gonzales, Nev Jones","doi":"10.1093/schbul/sbae035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and hypothesis: </strong>Cognitive health in schizophrenia spectrum psychosis has received substantial empirical attention in recent decades, coinciding with the development and implementation of interventions including cognitive remediation. Subjective experience in psychosis, including qualitative explorations of service user perspectives, has also proliferated; however, there is no available synthesis of service user representation in the psychosis cognitive health literature. This scoping review investigated prevalence and characteristics of qualitative research reporting service user perspectives across the extant research on cognitive health and related interventions in psychosis.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We conducted a literature search on qualitative methods in cognitive health and/or related interventions across PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycInfo databases. The review followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for scoping reviews and identified 23 papers. Data extraction included study design and sample characteristics, qualitative methodology, and reporting.</p><p><strong>Study results: </strong>Of 23 articles, 18 reported on user experiences of interventions, most often in the context of feasibility/acceptability for otherwise quantitative trials. Five studies described service user experiences of cognitive health separately from interventions. Only 3 included any service user involvement or participatory methods. Twenty articles reported any demographic characteristics, and fewer than half (11) reported any racial or ethnic sample characteristics. There was substantial variability in qualitative methodology and reporting across studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Qualitative methodology is lacking in its representation and rigor across the cognitive health literature for schizophrenia spectrum psychosis. Additional inclusion of service user lived experience is critical for future research to better characterize cognitive health and inform interventions to promote recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":21530,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"1006-1016"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11349025/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbae035","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and hypothesis: Cognitive health in schizophrenia spectrum psychosis has received substantial empirical attention in recent decades, coinciding with the development and implementation of interventions including cognitive remediation. Subjective experience in psychosis, including qualitative explorations of service user perspectives, has also proliferated; however, there is no available synthesis of service user representation in the psychosis cognitive health literature. This scoping review investigated prevalence and characteristics of qualitative research reporting service user perspectives across the extant research on cognitive health and related interventions in psychosis.

Study design: We conducted a literature search on qualitative methods in cognitive health and/or related interventions across PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycInfo databases. The review followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines for scoping reviews and identified 23 papers. Data extraction included study design and sample characteristics, qualitative methodology, and reporting.

Study results: Of 23 articles, 18 reported on user experiences of interventions, most often in the context of feasibility/acceptability for otherwise quantitative trials. Five studies described service user experiences of cognitive health separately from interventions. Only 3 included any service user involvement or participatory methods. Twenty articles reported any demographic characteristics, and fewer than half (11) reported any racial or ethnic sample characteristics. There was substantial variability in qualitative methodology and reporting across studies.

Conclusions: Qualitative methodology is lacking in its representation and rigor across the cognitive health literature for schizophrenia spectrum psychosis. Additional inclusion of service user lived experience is critical for future research to better characterize cognitive health and inform interventions to promote recovery.

认知健康及相关精神病干预定性研究中的服务使用者代表:范围审查》。
背景与假设:近几十年来,精神分裂症谱系精神病的认知健康受到了大量的实证关注,与此同时,包括认知矫正在内的干预措施也得到了发展和实施。精神病患者的主观体验,包括对服务使用者视角的定性探索,也大量涌现;然而,在精神病认知健康文献中,还没有关于服务使用者代表性的综述。本范围界定综述调查了现存的精神病认知健康及相关干预研究中报告服务使用者观点的定性研究的普遍性和特点:我们在 PubMed、Web of Science 和 PsycInfo 数据库中对认知健康和/或相关干预的定性方法进行了文献检索。综述遵循了PRISMA-ScR范围界定综述指南,确定了23篇论文。数据提取包括研究设计和样本特征、定性方法和报告:在 23 篇文章中,有 18 篇报告了用户对干预措施的体验,大多数情况下都是在可行性/可接受性的背景下进行的定量试验。五项研究将服务使用者的认知健康体验与干预措施分开描述。只有 3 项研究采用了服务使用者参与或参与式方法。20 篇文章报告了任何人口统计特征,不到一半(11 篇)的文章报告了任何种族或民族样本特征。不同研究在定性方法和报告方面存在很大差异:结论:定性方法在精神分裂症谱系精神病认知健康文献中缺乏代表性和严谨性。为了更好地描述认知健康的特征并为促进康复的干预措施提供信息,未来的研究必须更多地纳入服务使用者的生活经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Schizophrenia Bulletin
Schizophrenia Bulletin 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Schizophrenia Bulletin seeks to review recent developments and empirically based hypotheses regarding the etiology and treatment of schizophrenia. We view the field as broad and deep, and will publish new knowledge ranging from the molecular basis to social and cultural factors. We will give new emphasis to translational reports which simultaneously highlight basic neurobiological mechanisms and clinical manifestations. Some of the Bulletin content is invited as special features or manuscripts organized as a theme by special guest editors. Most pages of the Bulletin are devoted to unsolicited manuscripts of high quality that report original data or where we can provide a special venue for a major study or workshop report. Supplement issues are sometimes provided for manuscripts reporting from a recent conference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信