MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414915506 · doi:10.1111/hex.70441

<i>‘Every Voice Matters’:</i> A Photovoice Study on the Personal Impacts of Co‐Production in Recovery Colleges

2025· article· en· W4414915506 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa D. Hawke, Shelby Mckee, Holly Harris, Amy Hsieh, J. Svoboda, Maral Sahaguian, Gail Bellissimo, Melissa Hiebert, Kelly Lawless, George James, Sean Patenaude, Jordana Rovet, Sophie Soklaridis

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Expectations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceMental healthSubstance useLived experienceMEDLINEHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The engagement of people with lived experience (PWLE) of mental health and substance use health challenges in the co-production of health services, programming and research has many benefits, but how co-production impacts those involved remains unclear. Recovery Colleges are low-barrier, generally co-produced education programmes focused on mental health and wellness. Designed to support individuals on their personal recovery journeys, they provide a meaningful setting to explore the impacts of co-production. OBJECTIVE: This co-produced study explored the impact of co-production within recovery-oriented programming using a photovoice methodology. Photovoice captured the lived experiences and expertise of people involved in Canadian Recovery Colleges as curriculum designers, facilitators and/or students. METHOD: A sample of 21 participants with co-production experience took part in seven photovoice workshops. These culminated in a final photo submission that illustrated how co-production has impacted them. Eighteen participants completed a focus group discussion on the topic, which was audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using codebook thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were generated from the data. Participants found that co-production (1) reduced stigma, (2) provided a space to collectively share lived experience, (3) helped them develop a sense of belonging, (4) helped them advance their personal recovery journeys and (5) supported their personal growth. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that co-production in Recovery College settings has a wide range of positive impacts for the individuals involved, across a range of personal factors. The co-production of services, programme development and research can create positive meaning for those involved in mental health and substance use health settings, as well as potentially other broader health settings, which may aid in their recovery journeys. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A Recovery College research subcommittee, including individuals with lived experience of mental health and/or substance use challenges, co-produced every phase of this study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.159
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth ExpectationsSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207