Strengthening Review and Publication of Participatory Mental Health Research to Promote Empowerment and Prevent Co-optation.

As reviewers, editors, and researchers with lived experience of mental health challenges, addiction, and/or psychosocial distress/disability, the authors have struggled to find an adequate way to address inappropriate or misleading use of the term "participatory methods" to describe research that involves people with lived experience in only a superficial or tokenistic manner. The authors of this article have found that, in their experience, editors or other reviewers often appear to give authors extensive leeway on claims of participatory methods that more accurately reflect tokenism or superficial involvement. The problem of co-optation is described, examples from the authors' experiences are given, the potential harms arising from co-optation are articulated, and a series of concrete actions that journal editors, reviewers, and authors can take to preserve the core intent of participatory approaches are offered. The authors conclude with a call to action: the mental health field must ensure that power imbalances that sustain epistemic injustice against people with lived experience are not worsened by poorly conducted or reported studies or by tokenistic participatory methods.

A Smart Technology Intervention in the Homes of People with Mental Illness and Physical Comorbidities.

Appropriate support in the home may not be readily available for people living in the community with mental illness and physical comorbidities. This mixed-method study evaluated a smart home technology intervention for individuals within this population as well as providing health care providers with health monitoring capabilities. The study recruited 13 participants who were offered a smartphone, a touchscreen monitor, and health devices, including smartwatches, weigh scales, and automated medication dispensers. Healthcare providers were able to track health device data, which were synchronized with the Lawson Integrated DataBase. Participants completed interviews at baseline as well as at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. Focus groups with participants and care providers were conducted separately at 6-month and 12-month time points. As the sample size was too small for meaningful statistical inference, only descriptive statistics were presented. However, the qualitative analyses revealed improvements in physical and mental health, as well as enhanced communication with care providers and friends/family. Technical difficulties and considerations are addressed. Ethics analyses revealed advancement in equity and fairness, while policy analyses revealed plentiful opportunities for informing policymakers. The economic costs are also discussed. Further studies and technological interventions are recommended to explore and expand upon in-home technologies that can be easily implemented into the living environment.