129 Perspective matters in recovery in a team process and enhance interpretative depth (34). In short, two members of the research team per interview (KW, MdK, MLr or TB) read, reread and annotated the interview transcript. They compiled a narrative report and consequently, a pointby-point scheme containing preliminary themes developed from the interview. In group meetings, we then collated the themes separately for persons with severe mental illness, family and professionals, which TB and MdK then coded back onto the transcripts of the according perspective using the MAXQDA qualitative analysis package (35). In the second stage, TB further developed themes and articulated their meaning by assessing their fit across cases, splitting, or merging themes. In the third stage, we used focus group transcripts to enhance our understanding of the main themes developed from the interviews. During each stage, we switched back and forth between the three perspectives, evaluating how themes developed from one perspective were represented in others. Figure 1: Relationships respondents talk about that themes can refer to. Legend: Example for a respondent with severe mental illness: red font. Relationship talked about: green arrows. Panel A: person with severe mental illness talks about relationship with family member. Panel B: person with severe mental illness talks about relationship with professional. Panel C: person with severe mental illness talks about relationship between family member and professional. Reflexivity of the researchers, and interpretative depth of the analysis have been influenced by (professional) background of the ones doing the analysis and crossperspective exchanges throughout data-acquisition, analysis and writing. The mental health professionals (psychiatrist – MdK, psychologist – MLr, resident in psychiatry – TB) had clinical experience within long-term mental healthcare, which helped understanding the care context of the respondents, whereas the outsider perspective of the health scientist (KW) helped to reflect on our view as professionals. Our exchanges with co-interviewers and consultations with the project group on the preliminary results after the interview stage and while drafting the manuscript helped our sensitivity to topics important to persons with severe mental illness and their family. Our analysis thus represents an insider perspective of researchers familiar to a professional point of view, informed by the other perspectives present within the triad, enhancing confirmability. 7
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw