IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmen00/0000010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experience is central and connections matter: A Leximancer analysis of the research priorities of people with lived experience of mental health issues in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Michelle Banfield
  • Amelia Gulliver
  • Dana Jazayeri
  • Victoria J Palmer
  • the ALIVE National Centre for Mental Health Research Translation Investigator Group

Abstract

Mental health research priority-setting has a long history internationally. Many of these studies use expert panels or consensus methods across multiple mental health stakeholder groups. Whilst such approaches are designed to produce agreed research priorities, there is a risk that the specific and nuanced priorities of less powerful groups, especially those with lived experience of mental health issues, are lost in translation. We aimed to develop Australian mental health research priorities from the perspectives of people living with mental ill-health and their carers, families and kinship group members. A cross-sectional, open-ended survey was conducted nationally in Australia during January and February 2022. We asked participants to list three priorities on which mental health research should focus. Responses were analysed using Leximancer, a text analytics tool, to examine the concepts and their connections across the data. A total of 365 people with lived experience of mental ill-health participated in the survey. The majority (57%) identified as consumers, with 14% identifying as carers and 29% reporting both types of lived experience. Participants were from all Australian states and territories and from metropolitan, regional and remote areas. The Leximancer analysis generated 30 concepts in six thematic priority areas. The most prominent themes were experience, treatment and impact, followed by stigma, peer and trauma. The concept maps displayed complex connections and interrelationships between specific concepts, with lived experience a large and central concept. Analysis of the textual responses emphasised the importance of examining specifics, as the nuanced research priorities traversed themes and concept across the maps. This project provides robust evidence on the central importance of experience as driving mental health lived experience research priorities. Further, it demonstrates that people with lived experience describe the key issues in complex, interrelated ways that require multi-factorial research approaches to address.

Suggested Citation

  • Michelle Banfield & Amelia Gulliver & Dana Jazayeri & Victoria J Palmer & the ALIVE National Centre for Mental Health Research Translation Investigator Group, 2024. "Experience is central and connections matter: A Leximancer analysis of the research priorities of people with lived experience of mental health issues in Australia," PLOS Mental Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(1), pages 1-17, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmen00:0000010
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmen.0000010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmen.0000010
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmen.0000010&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmen.0000010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amelia Gulliver & Alyssa R. Morse & Michelle Banfield, 2022. "Keeping the Agenda Current: Evolution of Australian Lived Experience Mental Health Research Priorities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-14, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmen00:0000010. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: mentalhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/mentalhealth/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.