Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of participants

From: Patients’ and volunteer coaches’ experiences with an informal social network intervention in forensic psychiatric care: a qualitative analysis

 

Patients (N = 22)

Coaches (N = 14)

Age, mean ( SD )

43.1 (12.7)

39.4 (13.0)

Sex, n(%)

  

  Male

21 (95.5)

11 (78.6)

  Female

1 (4.5)

3 (21.4)

Highest educational attainment, n(%)

  

  Primary education (or no qualification)

7 (31.8)

0 (0)

  Lower secondary vocational education

10 (45.5)

0 (0)

  Upper secondary education

4 (18.2)

2 (14.3)

  Bachelor’s or higher education level

1 (4.5)

12 (85.7)

Occupation, n(%)

  

  Paid employment

5 (22.7)

12 (85.7)

  Retired

0 (0)

2 (14.3)

  Education

2 (9.1)

0 (0)

  Unpaid organized activitiesa

10 (45.5)

0 (0)

  Otherb

6 (27.3)

0 (0)

Primary clinical diagnosis, n(%)

  

  Substance use disorders

11 (50.0)

-

  Schizophrenia and psychotic spectrum disorders

4 (18.2)

-

  Autism spectrum disorders

2 (9.1)

-

  Other

5 (22.7)

-

Comorbidity, n(%)

19 (86.4)

-

Mandatory treatment, n(%)

15 (68.2)

-

Duration forensic outpatient care, mean ( SD ) c

26.5 (21.8)

-

Previous volunteer coaching experience, n(%)

-

8 (61.5)d

Personal experience, n(%)

  

  Mental health problems

-

2 (15.4)d

  Addiction problems

-

2 (15.4)d

  Criminal problems

-

1 (7.7)d

Number of face-to-face contacts, n(%)

  

  NA, not matched

6 (27.3)

 

  0 contacts

1 (0.0)

-

  1–10 contacts

6 (27.3)

-

  11–23 contacts

9 (40.9)

-

Type of contact, n(%)

  

  Face-to-face

15 (68.2)

-

  Ear-to-eare

10 (45.5)

-

  Messaging (WhatsApp, SMS, Email)e

11 (50.0)

-

  1. SD = standard deviation, NA = not applicable, acategory includes daytime activities in day center, work experience project, and volunteer work, bother includes no activities, housekeeping, and therapy, cmean in months, dn = 13, ereported ear-to-ear contact and messaging are in addition to face-to-face contacts