“These are people just like us who can work”: Overcoming clinical resistance and shifting views in the implementation of Individual Placement and Support (IPS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Individual Placement and Support (IPS) is a recovery-based approach to support people with mental health difficulties back into employment. Embedding of IPS within the mental health Multi-Disciplinary Team (MDT) is a key component of IPS fidelity; however, few studies have examined how those involved with IPS implementation navigate this process. This article explores how IPS Employment Specialists (ES) and Occupational Therapist (OT) Managers integrated and embedded IPS within traditionally-oriented MDTs as part of a national reform program in the Republic of Ireland. METHODS: The study design was qualitative, descriptive with data collected through three focus groups with 17 IPS ESs and 11 OT Managers. Data were analyzed using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Three key themes emerged from analysis. The first characterizes the context into which IPS landed, described as one marked by clinical resistance, doubt, and fear of risk. The second explores the strategies and factors that helped with the introduction of IPS into Irish mental health services. These included strategies, such as providing education and information about IPS and reassuring the MDT about IPS governance and IPS ES' competencies. The evidenced-based nature of IPS and its attached accountabilities through IPS fidelity measures were perceived to be an important factor in its acceptance. The final theme encapsulates perceptions of how IPS impacted on the MDTs' views of people with mental health difficulties. Findings suggest a shift in the ways in which MDTs view their clients. Initial fears about work capacity and risk shifted towards seeing people beyond the label of 'service user' and their diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: It is contended that IPS is an approach that allows practitioners to engage with real recovery-practice and may be one key to unlocking how a recovery approach can truly trickle down and embed itself within mental health service provision and support mental health system reform.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.043 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".