File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Cultural influences on fidelity components in recovery colleges: A study across 28 countries and territories

TitleCultural influences on fidelity components in recovery colleges: A study across 28 countries and territories
Authors
Keywordsadaptation, psychological
ethnopsychology
mental health
mental health services
Issue Date27-May-2025
PublisherBMJ Publishing Group
Citation
General Psychiatry, 2025, v. 38, n. 3 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground Recovery colleges (RCs) support personal recovery through education, skill development and social support for people with mental health problems, carers and staff. Guided by co-production and adult learning principles, RCs represent a recent mental health innovation. Since the first RC opened in England in 2009, RCs have expanded to 28 countries and territories. However, most RC research has been conducted in Western countries with similar cultural characteristics, limiting understanding of how RCs can be culturally adapted. The 12-item Recovery Colleges Characterisation and Testing (RECOLLECT) Fidelity Measure (RFM) evaluates the operational fidelity of RCs based on 12 components, but cultural influences on these components remain underexplored. Aims To assess associations between Hofstede's cultural dimensions and RFM items to identify cultural influences on fidelity components. Methods A cross-sectional survey of RC managers was conducted across all 221 RCs. Mixed-effects regression models examined associations between Hofstede's country-level cultural dimensions and item-level RFM scores, adjusted for healthcare expenditure and income inequality. Four cultural dimensions, obtained from Hofstede, were analysed: individualism (prioritising personal needs), indulgence (enjoyment-oriented), uncertainty avoidance (preference for predictability) and long-term orientation (future-focused). Results The RFM was completed by 169 (76%) RC managers. Seven RFM items showed associations with cultural dimensions. Equality was linked to short-term orientation, while learning was associated with individualism and uncertainty avoidance. Both individualism and indulgence influenced co-production and community focus. Commitment to recovery was shaped by all four cultural dimensions, with the strongest associations seen for individualism and indulgence. Individualism enhanced explicit focus on strengths-based practice, while uncertainty avoidance influenced course distinctiveness. Conclusions This study demonstrates how culture shapes RC fidelity components, providing actionable insights for cultural adaptation. Incorporating under-represented dimensions, such as collectivism and restraint, could improve the RFM's global applicability, facilitating implementation. Future research should explore cultural nuances, engage diverse stakeholders and refine fidelity measures to enhance RC inclusivity and effectiveness worldwide.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/357745
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 5.3
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKotera, Yasuhiro-
dc.contributor.authorRonaldson, Amy-
dc.contributor.authorTakhi, Simran-
dc.contributor.authorFelix, Simon-
dc.contributor.authorNamasaba, Mariam-
dc.contributor.authorLawrence, Simon-
dc.contributor.authorKellermann, Vanessa-
dc.contributor.authorKapka, Agnieszka-
dc.contributor.authorHayes, Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorDunnett, Danielle-
dc.contributor.authorJebara, Tesnime-
dc.contributor.authorMurakami, Michio-
dc.contributor.authorBakolis, Ioannis-
dc.contributor.authorRepper, Julie-
dc.contributor.authorMeddings, Sara-
dc.contributor.authorStergiopoulos, Vicky-
dc.contributor.authorBrophy, Lisa-
dc.contributor.authorDe Ruysscher, Clara-
dc.contributor.authorEplov, Lene-
dc.contributor.authorToernes, Charlotte-
dc.contributor.authorNarusson, Dagmar-
dc.contributor.authorPuschner, Bernd-
dc.contributor.authorHiltensperger, Ramona-
dc.contributor.authorMiyamoto, Yuki-
dc.contributor.authorCastelein, Stynke-
dc.contributor.authorKlevan, Trude Gøril-
dc.contributor.authorMorland-Jones, Hannah-
dc.contributor.authorMoore, Edith-
dc.contributor.authorTse, Samson-
dc.contributor.authorRyan, Michael-
dc.contributor.authorZuaboni, Gianfranco-
dc.contributor.authorHanlon, Charlotte-
dc.contributor.authorAsher, Laura-
dc.contributor.authorVanderplasschen, Wouter-
dc.contributor.authorOchoa, Susana-
dc.contributor.authorTolonen, Jonna-
dc.contributor.authorCharles, Ashleigh-
dc.contributor.authorAndrade, Mário-
dc.contributor.authorElton, Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorBates, Peter-
dc.contributor.authorCooper, Julie-
dc.contributor.authorGrant, Jason-
dc.contributor.authorHenderson, Claire-
dc.contributor.authorSlade, Mike-
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-22T03:14:40Z-
dc.date.available2025-07-22T03:14:40Z-
dc.date.issued2025-05-27-
dc.identifier.citationGeneral Psychiatry, 2025, v. 38, n. 3-
dc.identifier.issn2096-5923-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/357745-
dc.description.abstractBackground Recovery colleges (RCs) support personal recovery through education, skill development and social support for people with mental health problems, carers and staff. Guided by co-production and adult learning principles, RCs represent a recent mental health innovation. Since the first RC opened in England in 2009, RCs have expanded to 28 countries and territories. However, most RC research has been conducted in Western countries with similar cultural characteristics, limiting understanding of how RCs can be culturally adapted. The 12-item Recovery Colleges Characterisation and Testing (RECOLLECT) Fidelity Measure (RFM) evaluates the operational fidelity of RCs based on 12 components, but cultural influences on these components remain underexplored. Aims To assess associations between Hofstede's cultural dimensions and RFM items to identify cultural influences on fidelity components. Methods A cross-sectional survey of RC managers was conducted across all 221 RCs. Mixed-effects regression models examined associations between Hofstede's country-level cultural dimensions and item-level RFM scores, adjusted for healthcare expenditure and income inequality. Four cultural dimensions, obtained from Hofstede, were analysed: individualism (prioritising personal needs), indulgence (enjoyment-oriented), uncertainty avoidance (preference for predictability) and long-term orientation (future-focused). Results The RFM was completed by 169 (76%) RC managers. Seven RFM items showed associations with cultural dimensions. Equality was linked to short-term orientation, while learning was associated with individualism and uncertainty avoidance. Both individualism and indulgence influenced co-production and community focus. Commitment to recovery was shaped by all four cultural dimensions, with the strongest associations seen for individualism and indulgence. Individualism enhanced explicit focus on strengths-based practice, while uncertainty avoidance influenced course distinctiveness. Conclusions This study demonstrates how culture shapes RC fidelity components, providing actionable insights for cultural adaptation. Incorporating under-represented dimensions, such as collectivism and restraint, could improve the RFM's global applicability, facilitating implementation. Future research should explore cultural nuances, engage diverse stakeholders and refine fidelity measures to enhance RC inclusivity and effectiveness worldwide.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Group-
dc.relation.ispartofGeneral Psychiatry-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectadaptation, psychological-
dc.subjectethnopsychology-
dc.subjectmental health-
dc.subjectmental health services-
dc.titleCultural influences on fidelity components in recovery colleges: A study across 28 countries and territories-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/gpsych-2024-102010-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-105008096669-
dc.identifier.volume38-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.eissn2517-729X-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:001504961900001-
dc.identifier.issnl2517-729X-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats