Cited by 12Occupational Therapy Practice and ResearchMental Health and Patient InvolvementPsychiatric care and mental health services

Breaking a cycle of perceived failure: The process of making changes toward a more balanced lifestyle

Lund, Kristine, Argentzell, Elisabeth, Bejerholm, Ulrika, Eklund, Mona·2019·Australian Occupational Therapy Journal

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Balancing Everyday Life (BEL) is a new lifestyle intervention for mental health services users, developed to support meaningful engagement in daily activities and a balanced lifestyle. This study aimed at exploring the BEL participants' process of making lifestyle changes. METHODS: This constructivist grounded theory study took place in Sweden from 2013-2017 and explored the processes of 19 BEL participants when making lifestyle changes. Data were collected through 29 interviews. RESULTS: A process of breaking a cycle of perceived failure and making changes toward a more balanced lifestyle was constructed, consisting of five categories: Going at it gently: change is an on-going process; Support for progress, permission to fail; Prioritising and setting boundaries; Adjusting for a sustainable balance; and Caring for a valued self. Each category included a strategy for change as well as a related inner change. Strategies involved learning and trying techniques for making changes toward a more balanced lifestyle, whereas the personal changes often involved a more self-compassionate approach and allowing oneself to utilise these techniques. CONCLUSION: The results contribute to knowledge in the process of making lifestyle changes, specifically, how strategies for change and inner changes interact and can support personal recovery toward mental health. This knowledge could help to support clients in making personally meaningful changes toward a more balanced lifestyle as well as inform future research in the process of making change.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1440-1630.12604

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lund, K., Argentzell, E., Bejerholm, U., & Eklund, M.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Lund, Kristine
Venue
Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-07-25
Volume
66
Issue
5
Pages
627-636
ISSN
  • 0045-0766 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1630
OpenAlex
W2964061720
Cited by
12
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Australian Occupational Therapy Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Vetenskapsrådet (Reg. No. 521-2013-2522)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Therapy Practice and Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychiatric care and mental health services
Keywords
lifestyle intervention, lifestyle modification, mental health service users, perceived failure, self-compassion, personal recovery, boundary setting, priority setting, inner change, change strategies
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Health Promotion, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Life Style, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Occupational Therapy, Qualitative Research, Grounded Theory

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