Evidence mapPaperPMID 39390823Full record

Trial reportEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2024

Peer-led recovery groups for people with psychosis in South Africa (PRIZE): Results of a randomized controlled feasibility trial.

Laura Asher, Bongwekazi Rapiya, Julie Repper, Tarylee Reddy, Bronwyn Myers, Gill Faris, Inge Petersen, Charlotte Hanlon, Carrie Brooke-Sumner

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Real-world comprehensive care of people living with schizophrenia: recommendations across different settings and clinical stages.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Laura AsherUnit of Lifespan and Population Health, Nottingham Centre of Public Health and Epidemiology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9857-6766
Bongwekazi RapiyaMental Health, Alcohol, Substance Use and Tobacco Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Francie Van Zijl Drive, Parow Valley, Cape Town, South Africa.
Julie RepperImplementing Recovery through Organisational Change, Nottingham, UK.
Tarylee ReddyBiostatistics Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Durban, South Africa.
Bronwyn MyersMental Health, Alcohol, Substance Use and Tobacco Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Francie Van Zijl Drive, Parow Valley, Cape Town, South Africa.
Gill FarisPurposeful People Development, Cape Town, South Africa.
Inge PetersenCentre for Rural Health, College of Health Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3573-4229
Charlotte HanlonCentre for Global Mental Health, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7937-3226
Carrie Brooke-SumnerMental Health, Alcohol, Substance Use and Tobacco Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Francie Van Zijl Drive, Parow Valley, Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9489-8717

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe aims of this feasibility trial were to assess the acceptability and feasibility of peer-led recovery groups for people with psychosis in a low-resource South African setting, to assess the feasibility of trial methods, and to determine key parameters in preparation for a definitive trial.

methodsThe design was an individually randomised feasibility trial comparing recovery groups in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) with TAU alone. Ninety-two isiXhosa-speaking people with psychosis and forty-seven linked caregivers were recruited from primary care clinics and randomly allocated to trial arms in a 1:1 allocation ratio. TAU comprised anti-psychotic medication delivered in primary care. The intervention arm comprised six recovery groups including service users and caregivers. Two-hour recovery group sessions were delivered weekly in a 2-month auxiliary social worker (ASW)-led phase, then a 3-month peer-led phase. To explore acceptability and feasibility, a mixed methods process evaluation included 25 in-depth interviews and 2 focus group discussions at 5 months with service users, caregivers and implementers, and quantitative data collection including attendance and facilitator competence. To explore potential effectiveness, quantitative outcome data (functioning, relapse, unmet needs, personal recovery, stigma, health service use, medication adherence and caregiver burden) were collected at baseline, 2 months and 5 months post randomisation. Trial registration: PACTR202202482587686.

resultsQualitative interviews revealed that recovery groups were broadly acceptable with most participants finding groups to be an enjoyable opportunity for social interaction, and joint problem-solving. Peer facilitation was a positive experience; however a minority of participants did not value expertise by lived experience to the same degree as expertise of professional facilitators. Attendance was moderate in the ASW-led phase (participants attended 59% sessions on average) and decreased in the peer-led phase (41% on average). Participants desired a greater focus on productive activities and financial security. Recovery groups appeared to positively impact on relapse. Relapse occurred in 1 (2.2%) of 46 participants in the recovery group arm compared to 8 (17.4%) of 46 participants in the control arm (risk difference -0.15 [95% CI: -0.26; -0.05]). Recovery groups also impacted on the number of days in the last month totally unable to work (mean 1.4 days recovery groups vs 7.7 days control; adjusted mean difference -6.3 [95%CI: -12.2; -0.3]). There were no effects on other outcomes.

conclusionPeer-led recovery groups for people with psychosis in South Africa are potentially acceptable, feasible and effective. A larger trial, incorporating amendments such as increased support for peer facilitators, is needed to demonstrate intervention effectiveness definitively.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesPeer GroupPsychotic DisordersAdultAntipsychotic AgentsCaregiversFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSouth AfricaAntipsychotic Agentscommunity mental healthcarepeer supportpersonal recoveryPsychosispsychosocial intervention

Identifiers

PMID39390823
PMCPMC11561686

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.