Experiences of recovery for Canadian forensic mental health patients and staff participating in a horse stables program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals in the forensic mental health system experience barriers to recovery and lack opportunities for engagement in meaningful activities. Equine interventions have the potential to promote recovery in forensic patients through opportunities to learn new skills and develop social relationships. However, the research on equine-assisted therapies in forensic mental health settings is limited and little is known about its role in recovery. The aim of this qualitative study is to explore forensic mental health patient and staff experiences of the Horse Stables Program at a psychiatric facility, and to identify aspects of the program deemed influential in facilitating patient recovery. Thirteen participants, forensic service users (n = 7) and staff (n = 6), involved in the program participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed and data were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s six phases of thematic analysis. Findings revealed four themes related to recovery: 1) Radical Shift in Environment, 2) Opportunity for New Roles, 3) Building Meaningful Connections, and 4) Expanding Horizons. Final themes from this study were found to align with the literature on recovery in both general and forensic mental health settings. Participants expressed positive experiences at the stables and conveyed that the Horse Stables Program promoted recovery and well-being.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".