Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Oct 4;6(10):e14233.
doi: 10.2196/14233.

Curation of Mental Health Recovery Narrative Collections: Systematic Review and Qualitative Synthesis

Affiliations
Review

Curation of Mental Health Recovery Narrative Collections: Systematic Review and Qualitative Synthesis

Rose McGranahan et al. JMIR Ment Health. .

Abstract

Background: Mental health recovery narratives are first-person lived experience accounts of recovery from mental health problems, which refer to events or actions over a period. They are readily available either individually or in collections of recovery narratives published in books, health service booklets, or on the Web. Collections of recovery narratives have been used in a range of mental health interventions, and organizations or individuals who curate collections can therefore influence how mental health problems are seen and understood. No systematic review has been conducted of research into curatorial decision making.

Objective: This study aimed to produce a conceptual framework identifying and categorizing decisions made in the curation of mental health recovery narrative collections.

Methods: A conceptual framework was produced through a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. Research articles were identified through searching bibliographic databases (n=13), indexes of specific journals (n=3), and gray literature repositories (n=4). Informal documents presenting knowledge about curation were identified from editorial chapters of electronically available books (n=50), public documents provided by Web-based collections (n=50), and prefaces of health service booklets identified through expert consultation (n=3). Narrative summaries of included research articles were produced. A qualitative evidence synthesis was conducted on all included documents through an inductive thematic analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify differences in curatorial concerns between Web-based and printed collections.

Results: A total of 5410 documents were screened, and 23 documents were included. These comprised 1 research publication and 22 informal documents. Moreover, 9 higher level themes were identified, which considered: the intended purpose and audience of the collection; how to support safety of narrators, recipients, and third parties; the processes of collecting, selecting, organizing, and presenting recovery narratives; ethical and legal issues around collections; and the societal positioning of the collection. Web-based collections placed more emphasis on providing benefits for narrators and providing safety for recipients. Printed collections placed more emphasis on the ordering of narrative within printed material and the political context.

Conclusions: Only 1 research article was identified despite extensive searches, and hence this review has revealed a lack of peer-reviewed empirical research regarding the curation of recovery narrative collections. The conceptual framework can be used as a preliminary version of reporting guidelines for use when reporting on health care interventions that make use of narrative collections. It provides a theory base to inform the development of new narrative collections for use in complex mental health interventions. Collections can serve as a mechanism for supporting collective rather than individual discourses around mental health.

Keywords: culturally appropriate technology; mental health recovery; narrative medicine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram for documents included in qualitative synthesis.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World Health Organization . Mental Health Action Plan 2013-2020. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2013.
    1. Leamy M, Bird V, le Boutillier C, Williams J, Slade M. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;199(6):445–52. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.110.083733.S0007125000256766 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anthony WA. Recovery from mental illness: the guiding vision of the mental health service system in the 1990s. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 1993;16(4):11–23. doi: 10.1037/h0095655. - DOI
    1. Clarke S, Oades LG, Crowe TP. Recovery in mental health: a movement towards well-being and meaning in contrast to an avoidance of symptoms. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2012;35(4):297–304. doi: 10.2975/35.4.2012.297.304.T2561803Q51N1885 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Slade M. Personal Recovery and Mental Illness: A Guide for Mental Health Professionals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009.

LinkOut - more resources