ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Recovery as an intersubjective process: an autoethnography of experiential knowledge in mental health.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study explores how personal recovery is socially constituted in everyday life, providing a novel perspective through the experiential knowledge of an expert-by-experience (EBE) explored using autoethnography. It aims to contribute to the advancement of recovery frameworks by examining the intersubjective dynamics of recovery. Methods: The data comprised a personal diary maintained over 85 days, beginning April 1, 2024. Inductive thematic analysis was conducted on 2,142 textual units to identify recurring patterns and themes. Analytic rigor was supported through iterative coding, repeated engagement with the data, and reflexive analysis grounded in established autoethnographic principles. Results: Four overarching themes emerged: (1) interpersonal relationships during recovery; (2) recovery process sensations; (3) environmental factors influencing recovery; and (4) cognition of the recovery process. A key finding is that recovery experiences are deeply relational and socially embedded, shaped by both supportive and challenging interpersonal dynamics as well as environmental constraints. Notably, recovery trajectories frequently include "flat periods" and emotional ambivalence, where positive and negative experiences coexist simultaneously instead of following a simple linear progression. Conclusion: These findings highlight recovery as a non-linear, intersubjective, and socially constituted process. The study contributes to the conceptual development of recovery by emphasizing the coexistence of ambivalent experiences and the significance of relational and contextual dynamics. For mental health nursing practices, this study suggests the importance of mental health professionals respecting individuals with mental illness' "flat periods" not merely as stagnation but as part of a complex, socially structured recovery and supporting value-based activities that allow individuals to transcend the salience of their illness even during these periods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.