The usefulness of bibliotherapy in a neuropsychology service
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Are bibliotherapy and online resources useful for people referred to a neuropsychology service?
IRAS ID
207700
Contact name
Natalie Leigh
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Lancaster University
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 3 months, 0 days
Research summary
Title: Are bibliotherapy and online resources useful for people referred to a neuropsychology service? The aim of this research is to discover the usefulness of accessing bibliotherapy (leaflets, self-help books or online resources) for people who have been referred to the Neuropsychology Service at Royal Preston Hospital with a likely functional condition (such as pain or gait disorder) and NEAD (non-epileptic attack disorder). This will be funded by Lancaster University and will be completed using a qualitative research method. This will involve completing semi-structured interviews with up to 10 participants, asking questions relating to how useful they found bibliotherapy. Interviews will last for a maximum of one hour but will be guided by participants and will stop when they feel they have had enough. It is expected that all interviews will be conducted within three months of data collection commencing. The interviews will then be transcribed and analysed using Thematic Analysis by the Chief Investigator, in line with professional codes of confidentiality. Eligibility for participation in this research includes that they are aged 18 or over and have been referred to the Neuropsychology Service at the Royal Preston Hospital. This research aims to find out if these resources are useful and if so, could they be recommended to people while they are waiting to access the service? This aims to produce better outcomes for service-users with functional conditions if the intervention is timely but there are delays in arranging clinical appointments. If bibliotherapy is found to be useful then it could allow service-users to gain some understanding of their condition prior to accessing the service. This could help to reduce the number of sessions required for treatment. This should also help the service-user pathway as they will be better informed about their condition and the ways of managing this.
REC name
South Central - Oxford B Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
16/SC/0417
Date of REC Opinion
26 Jul 2016
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion