MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412849298 · doi:10.1007/s43477-025-00170-w

Unpacking the Facilitation Component of a Toolkit for Implementing Mental Health Recovery Guidelines into Services

2025· article· en· W4412849298 on OpenAlexafffund
Myra Piat, Lucy Melville-Richards, Megan Wainwright, Marie-Pier Rivest, Eleni Sofouli, Kanwar Singh, Hélène Albert, Ian D. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Implementation Research and Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaDalhousie UniversityUniversité de MonctonMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsUnpackingComponent (thermodynamics)FacilitationMental healthComputer scienceProcess managementPsychologyBusinessPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Facilitation is an important, but complex strategy for implementing evidence into practice. It involves one or more individuals from within or outside an organisation taking on the role of a facilitator who enables change, provides support and problem-solves. It is often embedded or combined with multiple strategies making it challenging to study. Our objective in this qualitative follow-up study was to unpack the facilitation component of a complex implementation strategy for implementing mental health recovery guidelines for transforming services and systems called Walk the Talk toolkit. All the materials in the online toolkit are designed for facilitators to: (1) Establish an implementation team, (2) Conduct a 12-meeting planning process for implementing a recovery-oriented innovation and (3) Provide ongoing implementation coaching. We recruited 8 facilitators (researchers) and 32 Implementation Team members who had participated in the research project in which the toolkit was created and used for the first time. They participated in a semi-structured interview exploring their perspectives on facilitation. Interviews were analysed thematically. Findings emerged around three overarching themes: (1) Shifts in facilitation approaches, roles and intensity over the course of three toolkit stages, (2) Facilitator skills and attributes, such as relationship-building, simplifying implementation science concepts, and asserting equity, and (3) Facilitation challenges, which included reaching systematically excluded groups, recruiting and retaining service users and family members, confronting issues around facilitator background, and negotiating interpersonal tensions. We unpack the "black box" of facilitation and discuss the significance of deploying recovery as a shared language and vision. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43477-025-00170-w.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.017
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.420
GPT teacher head0.632
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Implementation Research and ApplicationsSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207