User involvement in efforts to improve the quality of drug misuse services in England: A national survey

References

• Anker J, Asmussen V, Kouvonen P, Tops D. Drug users and spaces for legitimate action. Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research, HelsinkiFinland 2006
   Google Scholar
• Bates E. Health systems and public scrutiny: Australia, Britain and the United States. Croom Helm, London 1983
   Google Scholar
• Berger E, Carter A, Casey D, Litchefield L. What's happening with consumer participation?. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Mental Health Nursing 1996; 5: 131–135
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Branfield F, Beresford P. Making user involvement work: Supporting service user networking and knowledge. York Publishing Services, YorkUK 2006
   Google Scholar
• Bryant J, Saxton M, Madden A, Bath N, Robinson S. Consumer participation in the planning and delivery of treatment services: The current arrangements. Drug and Alcohol Review 2008; 27: 130–137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Central Drugs Co-ordinating Unit. Tackling drugs to build a better Britain: The government's 10-year strategy for tackling drug misuse. The Stationery Office, London 1998
   Google Scholar
• Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing. National drug strategy: Australia's integrated framework 2004–2009. Australian Government, CanberraAustralia 2004
   Google Scholar
• Coote A, Lenaghan J. Citizens’ juries: Theory into practice. Institute for Public Policy Research, London 1997
   Google Scholar
• Crawford MJ, Aldridge T, Bhui K, Rutter D, Manley C, Weaver T. User involvement in the planning and delivery of mental health services: A cross-sectional survey of service users and providers. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 2003; 107: 410–414
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford MJ, Rutter D, Manley C, Bhui K, Weaver T, Fulop N, et al. Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of healthcare. British Medical Journal 2002; 325: 1263–1265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford MJ, Rutter D, Thelwall S. Service user involvement in change management: A literature review. National Co-ordinating Centre for Service Delivery and Organisation, London 2004, (Available at: http://www.sdo.lshtm.ac.uk/files/project/18-final-report.pdf–accessed 26 February 2008)
   Google Scholar
• Daykin N, Evans D, Petsoulas C, Sayers A. Evaluating the impact of patient and public involvement initiatives on UK health services: A systematic review. The Policy Press 2007; 3: 47–65
   Google Scholar
• Entwistle V, Andrew JE, Emslie MJ, Walker KA, Dorrian C, Angus VC, et al. Public opinion on systems for feeding back views to the National Health Service. Quality and Safety in Healthcare 2003; 12: 435–442
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foster J, Tyrell K, Cropper V, Hunt N. Two case studies of user involvement in the recruitment of staff of drug services. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 2007; 14: 89–94
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fountain J, Bashford J, Winters M. Black and minority ethnic communities in England: A review of the literature on drug use and related service provision. National Treatment Agency, London 2003
   Google Scholar
• Fry C, Dwyer R. For love or money? An exploratory study of why injecting drug users participate in research. Addiction 2001; 96: 1319–1325
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser B, Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine, Chicago 1967
   Google Scholar
• Griffiths R. NHS management enquiry report. Department of Health and Social Services, London 1983
   Google Scholar
• Grund JPC, Blanken P, Adriaans NFP, Kaplan CD, Barendregt C, Meeuwsen M. Reaching the unreached—Targeting hidden IDU populations with clean needles via unknown user groups. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 1992; 24: 41–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ham C, Alberti K. The medical profession, the public & the government. British Medical Journal 2002; 324: 838–842
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr T, Small W, Peeace W, Douglas D, Pierre A, Wood E. Harm reduction by a ‘user-run’ organization: A case study of the Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users (VANDU). International Journal of Drug Policy 2006; 17: 61–69
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord J, Ochocka J, Czarny W, MacGillivary H. Analysis of change within a mental health organization: A participatory process. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 1998; 21: 327–339
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Treatment Agency. NTA guidance for local partnerships on user and carer involvement. National Treatment Agency, London 2006
   Google Scholar
• Randall G, DrugScope. Drug services for homeless people—A good practice handbook. Home Office, London 2002
   Google Scholar
• Russell E, Smith C. Whose health is it anyway? Enabling participation. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2003; 57: 762–763
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutter D, Manley C, Weaver T, Crawford MJ, Fulop N. Patients or partners? Case studies of user involvement in planning and delivery of adult services in two recently-formed London mental health trusts. Social Science and Medicine 2004; 58: 1973–1984
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulte S, Moring J, Meier PS, Barrowclough C. User involvement and desired service developments in drug treatment: Service user and provider views. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 2007; 14: 277–287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Southwell M. A guide to involving and empowering drug users. National Treatment Agency (unpublished National Treatment Agency in partnership with National Drug Users Development Agency)., London 2002
   Google Scholar
• Stationery Office. Health and Social Care Act 2001. Stationery Office, London 2002
   Google Scholar
• Sweeney R. ‘Tickbox’ user involvement criticised. User news special edition. Drug and Alcohol Network, London February, 2006; 1–3
   Google Scholar
• Tanner D. Empowerment and care management: Swimming against the tide. Health & Social Care in the Community 1998; 6: 447–457
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todd S, Felce D, Beyer S, Shearn J, Perry J, Kilsby M. Strategic planning and progress under the All Wales Strategy: Reflecting the perceptions of stakeholders. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2000; 44: 31–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallcraft J, Read J, Sweeney A. On our own terms. The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health, London 2003
   Google Scholar
• WHO Regional Office for Europe. Targets for all. World Health Organization, CopenhagenDenmark 1985
   Google Scholar
• Wood E, Kerr T, Spittal PM, Small W, Tyndall MW, O'Shaughnessy MV, et al. Evaluation of an ‘unsanctioned’ peer-run syringe exchange programme. Journal of Urban Health 2003; 15: 56–65
   Google Scholar