Table 21GRADE Summary of Findings for Self-Efficacy Related to Secrecy and Disclosing of Mental Illness

Outcome, follow-up, no. participants (trials) Findings Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) What happens?
Self-efficacy Related to Secrecy and Disclosing of mental illness

Post-intervention: 107 (1 RCT 39 )

Post booster: 97 (1 RCT 39 )

Longest follow-up: 55 (1 RCT 40 )

One RCT39,40 with high risk of bias (unclear direction) reported on participants’ self- efficacy related to secrecy and disclosure of mental illness. The outcome was assessed by 2 questions - “How confident are you in making decisions and handling well all the issues related to disclosing your mental illness?” (p.171)39 and “How confident are you in making decisions and handling well all the issues related to keeping mental illness a secret?” Answers were rated from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much). Conley et al.,39 compared HOP-C with no peer support among university students with self-identified mental health concerns. The participants (n =117) were mostly female (82.2%), White (68.6%) and heterosexual (66.9%), and reported depressive symptoms (85.5%).

The trial39 showed that at post-intervention there may be little to no difference in the effect of peer support in efficacy related to keeping the mental illness a secret or to that related to disclosure of mental illness compared to no peer support.39

At post-booster, the trial showed that HOP may be favoured with respect to self-efficacy about disclosure (p =0.001) but there may be little to no difference in self-efficacy related to keeping mental illness a secret.39

At the 2 month follow-up assessment, the results suggested that there may be little to no difference in the effect of peer support vs. no peer support (waitlist) in self-efficacy related to secrecy or to disclosing mental illness.40

 Very low

due to serious concerns for risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, and imprecision.a

There may be little to no difference in the effect of HOP vs. waitlist control on self-efficacy about secrecy and disclosing mental illness post-intervention, but the evidence is very uncertain.

HOP may be favoured vs. waitlist control with respect to self-efficacy about secrecy and disclosing mental illness post-booster, but the evidence is very uncertain.

There may be little to no difference in the effect of HOP vs. waitlist control on self-efficacy about secrecy and disclosing mental illness at 2 months follow-up, but the evidence is very uncertain.

HOP= Honest, Open, Proud; HOP-C = Honest, Open, Proud–College; RCT = randomized controlled trial; TAU = treatment as usual

a

At post-intervention, post-booster and at follow-up: rated down once for risk of bias due to serious concerns about the potential for bias arising from missing outcome data and bias in measurement of the outcomes (participant reported subjective outcomes); rated down once due to serious concerns for inconsistency because of limited of evidence of consistency as only 1 trial was available that reported on the outcome at all time points; rated down once due to serious concerns for indirectness because only 1 program (HOP/HOP-C) was identified and the population seemed relatively homogenous, thereby lowering the generalizability of findings to peer support programs in general; rated down once due to serious concerns about imprecision because of the relatively lower sample size in each comparison; publication bias was not detected.

From: Peer Support Programs for Youth Mental Health

Cover of Peer Support Programs for Youth Mental Health
Peer Support Programs for Youth Mental Health: Health Technology Assessment [Internet].
Copyright © 2022 Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.

Except where otherwise noted, this work is distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-ND), a copy of which is available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.