mental health professional. There has been no service user/patient involvement in any of the conclusions that have been drawn in each of the studies, and especially in the first set of quantitative studies, which should raise awareness to the fact that the conclusions that have come up are seen as not impartial but are rather seen only through the eyes of the diagnosers themselves. In other words, service user perspectives and opinions were weakly reported in all of the studies. Future studies need to specify in more detail the demographics of those who are diagnosing or interpreting because they are central to the explanations for the main reason that has been highlighted many times in the chapter: that the diagnoser is as central as the diagnosed because they also belong to a culture and might therefore, understand the patientâ€™s symptoms from their ethnocentric perspective. What was evidenced in the review is the lack of information specifically within the United Kingdom on studies of symptoms of schizophrenia, cross-culturally. The United States seemed to have led on the amount of studies that were performed whilst the UKâ€™s researchers seem to have been more concerned with quantitative findings.
generally, there have been more quantitative analyses of symptoms and almost no qualitative reports of symptoms, which means that there is a need for more qualitative research on how we currently understand symptoms, not only from the angle of the diagnoser but also from the service userâ€™s perspective. Qualitative methods used in symptoms would allow for a profundity and strength that may not be accessed using quantitative techniques (Humberstone, 2002). Therefore, advocating more qualitative studies is one main point to make as a result of this meta-narrative, especially in the UK,
Thesis from Brunnel University, United Kingdom, London