查看文章

Biomedical approaches such as medication and health professional delivered therapies are considered the mainstay of treatment for people considered to have severe or enduring mental illhealth. They have dominated the mental health discourse and research for many decades (Corrigan and Penn, 1997; Lebowitz and Appelbaum, 2019) with little or no focus on social determinantinformed interventions in the mental health research literature. Randomized controlled trials, many funded by pharmaceutical companies, have been the dominant source of evidence in this field. They have largely determined what processes and outcomes are important to measure and also how they are measured. Whilst their contribution is important, they may not be the best way to evaluate complex mental health interventions in relation to individuals’ holistic recovery needs and experiences (Greenhalgh and Papoutsi, 2018; Paparini et al., 2020). Biomedical approaches can ameliorate symptoms, prevent relapse, and help individuals to manage stress and understand how to self-care for the clinical recovery from mental illness (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2014). However, much more is needed to address issues such as stigma, marginalization, and citizenship in the community for people with mental ill-health. Arising from significant lived experience advocacy over many decades, personal recovery is increasingly seen as part of good mental health care (Slade, 2009). Consequently, calls for lived experience perspectives are pervasive in the policies and practice guidelines of mental health service systems in many countries. Personal …