Patient experiences of occupational formulation: It's about getting to know me.

Ten people in one forensic hospital, so this describes their experiences only. There is no comparison group and no measure of change, so it cannot show that occupational formulation works or improves anything. Of 24 eligible patients, 10 declined, 2 became unwell and 2 were never invited, so those who took part may have held more positive views than those who did not. The time between making the formulation and being interviewed ranged from under a month to nine months. Longer gaps may have made recall harder, while shorter gaps meant less experience of using the document on which to reflect. The lived experience co-researcher died before analysis, so there was no lived experience input during re-reading, coding or theme development. Other lived experience workers reviewed a draft and viewed the findings as authentic. Member checking with participants was limited; a plain-language summary was developed and shared with them instead. Participants gave more criticism of goals and action steps than of other sections, which may mean they had contributed less to those parts of the document. The interviews were conducted by staff from the service, and the occupational therapist interviewer had worked there for nine years. The authors argue that familiarity helped people feel comfortable, but it shapes what participants choose to say.

One author, Lorrae Mynard, is the founder of OccupationalFormulation.com, which provides occupational formulation training. The work was funded by the Occupational Therapy Australia Research Foundation.

Do not read this as evidence that occupational formulation works or improves outcomes. It is ten patients describing their experience in a single hospital, with no comparison group and no measure of change, so it can only tell you what these patients said about the process. The authors themselves say longitudinal studies are still needed.