Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy
Introduction Peer online mental health forums are commonly used and offer accessible support. Positive and negative impacts have been reported by forum members and moderators, but it is unclear why these impacts occur, for whom and in which forums. This multiple method realist study explores underly...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2023-07-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/7/e075142.full |
| _version_ | 1827156334274936832 |
|---|---|
| author | Rachel Meacock Jo Rycroft-Malone Steven H Jones Mat Rawsthorne Elena Semino Nick Shryane Fiona Lobban Heather Robinson Paul Rayson Emma Donaldson Paul Marshall Zoe Glossop Rose Johnston Christopher Lodge Karen Machin Matthew Coole Jade Haines Kate Penhaligon Tamara Rakić Sara Wise |
| author_facet | Rachel Meacock Jo Rycroft-Malone Steven H Jones Mat Rawsthorne Elena Semino Nick Shryane Fiona Lobban Heather Robinson Paul Rayson Emma Donaldson Paul Marshall Zoe Glossop Rose Johnston Christopher Lodge Karen Machin Matthew Coole Jade Haines Kate Penhaligon Tamara Rakić Sara Wise |
| author_sort | Rachel Meacock |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction Peer online mental health forums are commonly used and offer accessible support. Positive and negative impacts have been reported by forum members and moderators, but it is unclear why these impacts occur, for whom and in which forums. This multiple method realist study explores underlying mechanisms to understand how forums work for different people. The findings will inform codesign of best practice guidance and policy tools to enhance the uptake and effectiveness of peer online mental health forums.Methods and analysis In workstream 1, we will conduct a realist synthesis, based on existing literature and interviews with approximately 20 stakeholders, to generate initial programme theories about the impacts of forums on members and moderators and mechanisms driving these. Initial theories that are relevant for forum design and implementation will be prioritised for testing in workstream 2.Workstream 2 is a multiple case study design with mixed methods with several online mental health forums differing in contextual features. Quantitative surveys of forum members, qualitative interviews and Corpus-based Discourse Analysis and Natural Language Processing of forum posts will be used to test and refine programme theories. Final programme theories will be developed through novel triangulation of the data.Workstream 3 will run alongside workstreams 1 and 2. Key stakeholders from participating forums, including members and moderators, will be recruited to a Codesign group. They will inform the study design and materials, refine and prioritise theories, and codesign best policy and practice guidance.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was granted by Solihull Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 314029). Findings will be reported in accordance with RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines, published as open access and shared widely, along with codesigned tools.Trial registration number ISRCTN 62469166; the protocol for the realist synthesis in workstream one is prospectively registered at PROSPERO CRD42022352528. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T15:29:15Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-1c9cde5c931041f9a650a8d53b2c5eda |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-03-20T23:07:48Z |
| publishDate | 2023-07-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj.art-1c9cde5c931041f9a650a8d53b2c5eda2024-08-04T14:40:10ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552023-07-0113710.1136/bmjopen-2023-075142Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policyRachel Meacock0Jo Rycroft-Malone1Steven H Jones2Mat Rawsthorne3Elena Semino4Nick Shryane5Fiona Lobban6Heather Robinson7Paul Rayson8Emma Donaldson9Paul Marshall10Zoe Glossop11Rose Johnston12Christopher Lodge13Karen Machin14Matthew Coole15Jade Haines16Kate Penhaligon17Tamara Rakić18Sara Wise19Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKFaculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKSpectrum Centre for Mental Health Research, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKBehavioural Data Science, Virtual Health Labs Ltd, Nottingham, UKLinguistics and English Language, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKSocial Statistics, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKSpectrum Centre for Mental Health Research, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK5Berkovic and Bladin Comprehensive Epilepsy Program, Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, AustraliaSchool of Computing and Communications, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKBerkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Berkshire, UKSpectrum Centre for Mental Health Research, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKSpectrum Centre for Mental Health Research, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKSpectrum Centre for Mental Health Research, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKSpectrum Centre for Mental Health Research, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKIndependent survivor researcher, Lancaster, UKSchool of Computing and Communications, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKBerkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Berkshire, UKBerkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Berkshire, UKSpectrum Centre, Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UKBerkshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Berkshire, UKIntroduction Peer online mental health forums are commonly used and offer accessible support. Positive and negative impacts have been reported by forum members and moderators, but it is unclear why these impacts occur, for whom and in which forums. This multiple method realist study explores underlying mechanisms to understand how forums work for different people. The findings will inform codesign of best practice guidance and policy tools to enhance the uptake and effectiveness of peer online mental health forums.Methods and analysis In workstream 1, we will conduct a realist synthesis, based on existing literature and interviews with approximately 20 stakeholders, to generate initial programme theories about the impacts of forums on members and moderators and mechanisms driving these. Initial theories that are relevant for forum design and implementation will be prioritised for testing in workstream 2.Workstream 2 is a multiple case study design with mixed methods with several online mental health forums differing in contextual features. Quantitative surveys of forum members, qualitative interviews and Corpus-based Discourse Analysis and Natural Language Processing of forum posts will be used to test and refine programme theories. Final programme theories will be developed through novel triangulation of the data.Workstream 3 will run alongside workstreams 1 and 2. Key stakeholders from participating forums, including members and moderators, will be recruited to a Codesign group. They will inform the study design and materials, refine and prioritise theories, and codesign best policy and practice guidance.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval was granted by Solihull Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 314029). Findings will be reported in accordance with RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines, published as open access and shared widely, along with codesigned tools.Trial registration number ISRCTN 62469166; the protocol for the realist synthesis in workstream one is prospectively registered at PROSPERO CRD42022352528.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/7/e075142.full |
| spellingShingle | Rachel Meacock Jo Rycroft-Malone Steven H Jones Mat Rawsthorne Elena Semino Nick Shryane Fiona Lobban Heather Robinson Paul Rayson Emma Donaldson Paul Marshall Zoe Glossop Rose Johnston Christopher Lodge Karen Machin Matthew Coole Jade Haines Kate Penhaligon Tamara Rakić Sara Wise Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy BMJ Open |
| title | Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy |
| title_full | Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy |
| title_fullStr | Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy |
| title_short | Improving Peer Online Forums (iPOF): protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy |
| title_sort | improving peer online forums ipof protocol for a realist evaluation of peer online mental health forums to inform practice and policy |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/13/7/e075142.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rachelmeacock improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT jorycroftmalone improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT stevenhjones improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT matrawsthorne improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT elenasemino improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT nickshryane improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT fionalobban improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT heatherrobinson improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT paulrayson improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT emmadonaldson improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT paulmarshall improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT zoeglossop improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT rosejohnston improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT christopherlodge improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT karenmachin improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT matthewcoole improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT jadehaines improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT katepenhaligon improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT tamararakic improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy AT sarawise improvingpeeronlineforumsipofprotocolforarealistevaluationofpeeronlinementalhealthforumstoinformpracticeandpolicy |