Person-centered planning in mental health: A transatlantic collaboration to tackle implementation barriers
Open accessAbstract
Collaborative, person-centered approaches to care planning are increasingly recognized as instrumental in supporting attainment of personal recovery outcomes. Yet, though much is known about factors that support person-centered planning, successful implementation often remains an elusive goal. This article reviews international efforts to promote person-centered care planning (PCCP) in the context of a randomized clinical trial in the United States and in the Meaningful and Measurable initiative, a collaborative action research project involving diverse provider organizations in Scotland. The authors review the history of international efforts to implement PCCP and offer preliminary evidence regarding its positive impact on both process outcomes (e.g., the nature of the primary therapeutic relationship and the service-user's experience) and personal recovery outcomes (e.g., quality of life, community belonging, and valued roles). PCCP will be defined through descriptions of key principles and practices as they relate to both relational aspects (e.g., shifts in stakeholder roles and conversations) and documentation/recording aspects (e.g., how person-centered relationships are captured in written or electronic records). Similarities and differences between the United States and Scottish experiences of PCCP are highlighted and a series of recommendations offered to further implementation of this essential recovery-oriented practice.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Overall, the concept analysis findings support person-centered care, highlighting increased empowerment of people with mental illness integrated into their biopsychosocial and cultural context.
“Overall, our findings support the notion of person-centered care, highlighting the increased empowerment of people with mental illness, integrated into their biopsychosocial and cultural context [81,82,83].”
From Therapeutic Adherence of People with Mental Disorders: An Evolutionary Concept Analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [81]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 32
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Adams N, & Grieder D (2014). Treatment planning for person-centered care: Shared decision making for whole health (2nd ed.). Waltham, MA: Academic Press.
- Balik B, Conway J, Zipperer L, & Watson J (2011). Achieving an exceptional patient and family experience of inpatient hospital care (IHI Innovation Series white paper). Cambridge, MA: Institute for Healthcare.
- Institute of Medicine. (2006). Improving the quality of health care for mental and substance-use conditions: Quality chasm series. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. 20669433
- Qureshi H (Ed.). (2001). Outcomes in social care practice, outcomes in community care practice number seven. York, England: University of York, Social Policy Research Unit.
- Smull M, & Lakin KC (2002). Public policy and person-centred planning In Holburn S & Vietze PM (Eds.), Person-centred planning: Research, practice and future directions (pp. 379– 398). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
- Stanhope V, Matthews EB, Choy-Brown M, & Doherty M (2017). Do providers know what they do not know? Understanding how knowledge acquisition relates to person-centered care practice. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Conference of the Society for Social Work and Research, New Orleans, LA, January.
- Authors
- Miller, E., Stanhope, V., Restrepo-Toro, M., & Tondora, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Strathclyde (GB)
- New York University (US)
- Yale University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Miller, Emma
- Venue
- American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation
- Publisher
- University of Nebraska Press
- Published
- 2017-07-03
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 251-267
- ISSN
- 1548-7768 (ISSN-L)
- 1548-7776
- PMC
- PMC6800658
- OpenAlex
- W2742102390
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 2.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- American Journal of Psychiatric Rehabilitation (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH099012)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
- Social Sciences › Education › Healthcare innovation and challenges
- Keywords
- mental health services, implementation barriers, personal recovery, therapeutic relationship, service user experiences, psychiatric rehabilitation, transatlantic cooperation, quality of life, community belonging, electronic health records, stakeholder roles
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review