Skip to main content
. 2020 Nov 24;11:574256. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.574256

Table 2.

Overview of the collected datab, sorted per participant.

Parti-cipant Narrative interview In between interviews RG meeting Evaluative interview Interviews RG members informal Interviews RG members formal Total
Visits Phone Total Partner Mother Brother Friend Total CM PS Other Total
Karen 1 3 1 4 2 1 0 3 1 4 12
John 1 4 4 7 1 1 1 2 1 1 16
Brit 1 5 1 6 4 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 2 5 20
Martin 1 2 2 4 1 0 3 3 9
Mandy 1 1 3 4 1 0 1 1 7
Leon 1 4 4 6 1 1 2 3 1 1 2 17
Raoul 3 3 4 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 12
Martha 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 2 7
Total 7 30 26 7 10 20 100
b

As we lost contact with one of the participants during the data collection (Martin) we could not conduct the final interview, nor ask his RG members (n = 4) to participate. Moreover, as one of the participants did not start a RG (Mandy) there were no RG meetings to attend and no RG members to interview. Also, one informal RG member (partner Karen) and one formal RG member (peer-worker John) did not respond to our request to interview them despite several attempts. Lastly, one of the participants (Raoul) had invited his mother and case-manager to the narrative interview, and therefore we couldn't follow the topic-guide. We added this interview to the “in-between” interviews.