162 Chapter 8 roles refers to a relational and content aspect. Respondents from all perspectives found establishing unconditional and meaningful contact important. This is something that has been found before in research (50, 51). Interacting within the triad is about expectations, informing, experiencing agency to change and (dis)agreement. Previous research has shown that perspectives on recovery can differ substantially between patients, (informal) caregivers and professionals (52). One example is that patients mainly name social aspects, and caregivers focus on clinical understandings of recovery (53). Apparently, although people share common factors in recovery (according to chapter 6), a specific role in the triad can influence the perspective on recovery. Strengths and limitations One strength of the research in this thesis is that it follows a clear scientific line of study, starting with a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature, continuing with first cross-sectional, and thereafter, longitudinal quantitative research in a relevant recruited study population and then zooming into the meaning of the numbers by using qualitative research methods. Regarding the meta-analysis, this was one of the first into the subject of the relationship between clinical and personal recovery. The quantitative research at Mentrum also added to existing literature, because a clinically representative population of mixed SMI, not only SSD, was investigated. Besides that, longitudinal research into personal recovery is scarce. The study in chapter 6 was unique in starting from the idea that recovery is a universally human concept, looking into not only patients, but also siblings and healthy controls. In line with this, the research into views within the triad of patients, family and mental health professionals, was also quite novel, including the fact that the research plan was developed together with people with lived experience and family members. An important limitation of studying personal recovery in a quantitative manner, as already stated in the general introduction, is that a highly individual story needs to be standardized into a questionnaire. Also, one needs to choose between defining personal recovery as a dichotomous, continuous or stages variable. The diversity of quantitative instruments to measure personal recovery, illustrates the complexity of the concept and the lack of consensus (54). Possibly, patients who agreed and were able to participate in the studies in this thesis were relatively well-functioning and might have had more positive views concerning their treatment. However, in the study at Mentrum we found that the sample was comparable to all potentially eligible patients regarding sociodemographic variables, gender, age, diagnosis, legal status and the Health of the Nation Outcome Scale (HoNOS) score, which is collected for Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) purpose.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw