Recovery Colleges or Something Different? The Development and Evaluation of a Reflection Tool for Recovery Colleges in the Netherlands

Recovery Colleges (RCs) are increasingly implemented worldwide, with a fidelity measure recently developed in the United Kingdom (UK). However, RCs may vary based on their operating contexts. In the Netherlands, a key deviation is that RCs are often peer-run rather than co-produced with mental healthcare providers, as outlined in the fidelity measure. This study assessed the measure's suitability in the Dutch context, leading to the development of a reflection tool (Phase 1) which was subsequently evaluated (Phase 2). The development phase involved focus groups with peer facilitators and coordinators from 16 RCs (N = 29) to capture critical elements of Dutch RCs. The tool was piloted (N = 5) and evaluated more broadly (N = 24). The tool provided valuable insights, highlighting shared values among RCs internationally and conceptual differences between Dutch and UK models. The findings raised questions about the boundaries of fidelity in co-created contexts such as RCs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Community Mental Health Journal
Published
2025-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-025-01517-1
Primary Topic
Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Recovery Colleges or Something Different? The Development and Evaluation of a Reflection Tool for Recovery Colleges in the Netherlands

Christien Muusse, Marloes van Wezel, Hans Kroon, Dike van de Mheen et al.
Community Mental Health Journal
Mental Health and Patient Involvement
article

Recovery Colleges or Something Different? The Development and Evaluation of a Reflection Tool for Recovery Colleges in the Netherlands

Christien Muusse, Marloes van Wezel, Hans Kroon, Dike van de Mheen, Jenny Boumans
article en

Abstract

Recovery Colleges (RCs) are increasingly implemented worldwide, with a fidelity measure recently developed in the United Kingdom (UK). However, RCs may vary based on their operating contexts. In the Netherlands, a key deviation is that RCs are often peer-run rather than co-produced with mental healthcare providers, as outlined in the fidelity measure. This study assessed the measure's suitability in the Dutch context, leading to the development of a reflection tool (Phase 1) which was subsequently evaluated (Phase 2). The development phase involved focus groups with peer facilitators and coordinators from 16 RCs (N = 29) to capture critical elements of Dutch RCs. The tool was piloted (N = 5) and evaluated more broadly (N = 24). The tool provided valuable insights, highlighting shared values among RCs internationally and conceptual differences between Dutch and UK models. The findings raised questions about the boundaries of fidelity in co-created contexts such as RCs.

Community Mental Health JournalVol. 62(2)
Tilburg University (NL), Trimbos Institute (NL)
Stichting tot Steun Vereniging tot Christelijke Verzorging van Geestes- en Zenuwzieken
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
Mental Health and Patient Involvement
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.