↓ Skip to main content

Staff understanding of recovery-orientated mental health practice: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, June 2015
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 (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
1 policy source
26 tweeters


89 Dimensions

Readers on

173 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.
Staff understanding of recovery-orientated mental health practice: a systematic review and narrative synthesis
Published in
Implementation Science, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13012-015-0275-4
Pubmed ID

Clair Le Boutillier, Agnes Chevalier, Vanessa Lawrence, Mary Leamy, Victoria J Bird, Rob Macpherson, Julie Williams, Mike Slade


Mental health policy is for staff to transform their practice towards a recovery orientation. Staff understanding of recovery-orientated practice will influence the implementation of this policy. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and narrative synthesis of empirical studies identifying clinician and manager conceptualisations of recovery-orientated practice. A systematic review of empirical primary research was conducted. Data sources were online databases (n = 8), journal table of contents (n = 5), internet, expert consultation (n = 13), reference lists of included studies and references to included studies. Narrative synthesis was used to integrate the findings. A total of 10,125 studies were screened, 245 full papers were retrieved, and 22 were included (participants, n = 1163). The following three conceptualisations of recovery-orientated practice were identified: clinical recovery, personal recovery and service-defined recovery. Service-defined recovery is a new conceptualisation which translates recovery into practice according to the goals and financial needs of the organisation. Organisational priorities influence staff understanding of recovery support. This influence is leading to the emergence of an additional meaning of recovery. The impact of service-led approaches to operationalising recovery-orientated practice has not been evaluated. The protocol for the review was pre-registered (PROSPERO 2013: CRD42013005942 ).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 6 3%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 166 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 17%
Researcher 24 14%
Other 9 5%
Student > Bachelor 9 5%
Other 35 20%
Unknown 34 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 20%
Social Sciences 28 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 10%
Arts and Humanities 4 2%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 40 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 18 April 2017.
All research outputs
of 22,382,868 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
of 1,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 252,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,382,868 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,710 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 252,236 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them