ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04639167PEERUpdated Feb 4, 2026

Paths to Everyday Life (PEER) - a Community-based Peer Support Intervention

An interventional study of Paths to everyday life (PEER) in Mental Health Impairment, Peer Group and Mental Health Disorder, sponsored by Amager Hospital. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-02-04.

Sponsored by Amager Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
299
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The aim of this randomized, two-arm, investigator initiated, multi municipal, parallel-group superiority trial is to compare the effect on self-reported personal recovery of the following interventions: (1) 10-week group-based peer support intervention "Paths to everyday life" (PEER) added to service as usual (SAU); and (2) SAU alone. The primary outcome is self-reported personal recovery at end of intervention. Secondary and exploratory measures include empowerment, quality of life, functioning, hope, self-efficacy, self-advocacy and social network. The investigators, hypothesize that the superiority of the PEER intervention will be applicable for secondary outcomes and exploratory measures at end of intervention so that improvement in empowerment, hope, self-efficacy, self-advocacy, social network, quality of life and functioning will be improved among participants allocated to the PEER intervention.

Read the detailed description

The "Paths to everyday life" (PEER) intervention is a newly developed community-based peer support intervention targeting persons with mental vulnerability and mental health difficulties. The development of the PEER intervention is conducted in a collaboration between the Peer partnership association and the Copenhagen Research Center for Mental Health (CORE), Recovery \& Inclusion, Mental Health Center Copenhagen.

The PEER intervention is inspired from: Peer support groups in the MIND Leeds organization; Manuals for peer support services and peer training, which has shown positive effect on measures of personal recovery in RCTs; Practical guides to everyday life developed by consumers of mental health treatment in Denmark; and lived experiences of mental illness and recovery within the project group. The content of the ten group sessions is developed from themes identified in the CHIME (Connectedness; Hope; Identity; Meaning; Empowerment) framework as promoting the personal recovery process, as well as knowledge from systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the field focusing on the effect of peer support. The entire PEER intervention is described in a comprehensive manual and detailed instructions have been prepared for the volunteer peers to make it accessible and ensure similarity across the groups. The manual of the PEER intervention has been further developed in a pilot study of the 10 week group sessions in a qualitative evaluation (N=25) in the period Feb.-Sept. 2020 in the collaborative municipalities Copenhagen, Elsinore and Fredericia.

The PEER intervention consists of a 10-week group course and the opportunity of individual companionship to e.g. local activities in civil society, municipal social services, education, health and employment. It is mandatory for the participants to participate in an introductory meeting with the purpose of informing about the group process, the individual companionship and the RCT, so that participation in the intervention becomes the participants' own informed choice. The group sessions are delivered by two volunteer peers with their own experiental knowledge of mental vulnerability and personal recovery. The volunteer peers must complete a basic peer education to facilitate the group course and enter individual companionship. A fidelity scale is developed and used for biannual fidelity reviews to ensure intervention program adherence and continuous focus on program implementation and improvement.

The overall purpose of the PEER intervention is to find a way to live life in a meaningful, energizing way - despite still finding some things challenging. The aim is to form a constructive community through group sessions where exchanges of lived experiences, mutuality and opportunities for social network development can form. The investigators hypothesize, that the volunteer peers by sharing their own experiences with mental vulnerability and personal recovery can create trust and inspire the participants to safely share their own experiences. Additionally, that the volunteer peers by presenting group themes and by participating on an equal footing with the participants in the group exercises can contribute to the participants' experience of connectedness with others, as well as promote the participants self-esteem and belief in possibilities, dreams and aspirations to regain meaning in life circumstances, control and responsibility for own life.

The PEER intervention will be evaluated in a two armed randomized controlled trial. The primary hypothesis for the trial is that participants allocated to the PEER intervention added to service as usual (SAU) gain a significantly increased experience of self-reported personal recovery at end of intervention than participants who are allocated to SAU alone.

The PEER intervention is not expected to have any severe side effects. However, when trial recruitment and the intervention phase has ended, safety measures i.e. number of somatic and psychiatric hospitalization days, death, suicide and probable self-harm is obtained from the Danish central registers to examine any severe adverse effects during the intervention period.

The sample size and power calculations was conducted using PS Power and Sample Size Calculations software. With an allocation ratio of 1:1 and a minimum clinically relevant difference of 5, a power of 80% and a significance level of 0.05%, we need 284 participants, i.e. 142 in the intervention group and 142 in the control group in order to reject the null hypothesis that self-assessed personal recovery is equal in the control group and the PEER group. Data analyzes will be based on the intention-to-treat principle i.e. that data from all participants will be included corresponding to the group to which the participants have been allocated. In case of missing data, multiple multivariate imputations will be used.

02

Conditions studied

  • Mental Health Impairment
  • Peer Group
  • Mental Health Disorder
  • Problems Psychosocial

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Peer support
  • Community-based
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Individual companionship
  • Volunteer peers
  • Peer group sessions
03

In context

Mental Disorders

1,740 studies on the registry are indexed under Mental Disorders; 348 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 299 is above the median of 100 across 1,301 interventional studies indexed under Mental Disorders.

Browse Mental Disorders studies →

Lead sponsor

Amager Hospital is the lead sponsor of 21 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Citizens using the municipal social service in the participating municipalities for support and assistance due to mental vulnerability and mental health difficulties, corresponding to the target group for §82 in the law of social service - i.e. citizens diagnosed with a mental illness and/or who is affected by mental dissatisfaction to a degree that limits the unfolding of life. Additionally, citizens who self-refer to the trial with similar mental health challenges.
  • Are residents of collaborating municipalities at baseline.
  • Can understand, speak, and read Danish.
  • Are aged 18 years or older.
  • Have given verbal and written consent to participate in the trial.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria:

  1. Citizens intoxicated by alcohol and/or other substances - if they according to the local coordinator's judgment cannot participate in the peer group, they are advised to contact professional help.
  2. Citizens with specific suicide plans - if they according to the local coordinator's judgment cannot participate in the peer group, they are advised to contact professional help.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
299 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Paths to everyday life (PEER)

    The Paths to everyday life (PEER) intervention added to service as usual (SAU) consists of a 10-week group course and an opportunity of individual companionship to persons with mental vulnerability and mental health difficulties. The 10 week group sessions is facilitated by two volunteer peers with their own lived experiences with mental vulnerability.

    Behavioral: Paths to everyday life (PEER)

  • No intervention
    Service as usual (SAU)

    Participants who will be allocated to the control group of the trial will receive service as usual (SAU) by their social security officer, or no specific service if the participant has been referred to the trial by self-referral. Participants who are referred to the trial via §82 in the municipality, can receive other §82 offers depending on the individual municipality.

Interventions

  • BehavioralPaths to everyday life (PEER)

    The intervention consists of a 10-week group course and the opportunity of individual companionship to e.g. local activities in civil society, municipal social services, education, health and employment. The 10-week group sessions are delivered by two volunteer peers with their own experiential knowledge of mental vulnerability and mental health difficulties. The aim is to form a constructive community through group sessions where exchanges of lived experiences, mutuality and opportunities for social network development can develop.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR-15)

    Personal recovery is measured with the Questionnaire about Process of Recovery (QPR-15), which consist of 15 items measuring aspects of personal recovery i.e. experiences of connectedness, hope, identity, meaning and empowerment - based on mental health consumer experiences of recovery. In psychometric evaluations, QPR-15 demonstrated good internal consistency and test-retest reliability, as well sufficient convergent validity and moderate sensitivity to change. Each item is scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) and gives a total score between 0-60.

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

Secondary outcomes

  1. The Empowerment Scale, Rogers (ESR)

    Empowerment is measured with The Empowerment scale Rogers (ESR), which consist of 28 items measuring a person's resources, opportunities and sense of control over their own life - based on mental health consumer experiences of empowerment. The Empowerment scale is widely used and validated and is scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree)

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

  2. The Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of life (MANSA)

    Quality of life is measured with The Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of life (MANSA), which consist of 16 items whereas 4 items measure objective quality of life (close relationships, contact with friends, crime and assault) and 12 items measure subjective quality of life (satisfaction with life as a whole, work, financial situation, friendships, leisure activities, housing, personal safety/security, cohabitation, sex life, family relationships and health). The questionnaire has been validated and is scored on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (couldn't be worse) to 7 (couldn't be better).

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

  3. Work and Social Adjusment Scale (WSAS),

    Functioning is measured with the Work and Social Adjusment Scale (WSAS), which is a 5-item self-reported questionnaire covering a person's perceived functioning in terms of the domains 1) Workability; 2) Performing tasks at home (cleaning, shopping, paying bills, etc.); 3) Social leisure activities (parties, dating, tours, visits, cinema, etc.); 4) private leisure activities (reading, gardening, sewing, walking alone, etc.) and; 5) Ability to form and maintain close relationships. The questionnaire is widely used and validated and scored on an 8-point scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 8 (very seriously).

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

Other outcomes

  1. General Self-efficacy (GSE)

    Self-efficacy is measured with the general self-efficacy scale (GSE), which consists of 10-items designed to assess optimistic self-beliefs to cope with a variety of difficult demands in life. The GSE scale is widely used and validated and is scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all true) to 4 (exactly true).

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

  2. The Self-advocacy scale (SAS)

    Self-advocacy is measured with the self-advocacy scale (SAS), which consists of 8-items involving taking care of yourself, being organized and prepared, finding the resources you need, and communicating and negotiating to get your needs met. The SAS scale is only used and validated in research about acquired brain injury and scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not confident) to 4 (very confident).

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

  3. State Hope Scale (SHS)

    Hope is measured with the State Hope Scale (SHS), which consist of 6-items measuring hope ie the belief in one's own ability to initiate and maintain actions and ways to achieve goals. The state hope scale is widely used and validated and scored on an 8-point scale ranging from 1 (definitely false) to 8 (definitely true).

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

  4. Copenhagen Social Relations Questionnaire (CSRQ)

    Social network is measured with a modified version of the Copenhagen Social Relations Questionnaire (CSRQ), which consist of 19-items covering frequency of social contact, social support in everyday life, quality of social relations and frequency of participating in local social activities. The questionnaire has satisfactory validity and reliability and is widely used in Danish population surveys.

    Time frame: At end of intervention (3 months)

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Mental Health Centre Copenhagen
    Copenhagen, Hellerup 3900, Denmark
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Pitt V, Lowe D, Hill S, Prictor M, Hetrick SE, Ryan R, Berends L. Consumer-providers of care for adult clients of statutory mental health services. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Mar 28;2013(3):CD004807. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004807.pub2. PubMed 23543537 ↗
  • Fuhr DC, Salisbury TT, De Silva MJ, Atif N, van Ginneken N, Rahman A, Patel V. Effectiveness of peer-delivered interventions for severe mental illness and depression on clinical and psychosocial outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2014 Nov;49(11):1691-702. doi: 10.1007/s00127-014-0857-5. Epub 2014 Mar 17. PubMed 24632847 ↗
  • Lloyd-Evans B, Mayo-Wilson E, Harrison B, Istead H, Brown E, Pilling S, Johnson S, Kendall T. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of peer support for people with severe mental illness. BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Feb 14;14:39. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-14-39. PubMed 24528545 ↗
  • Gillard S, Gibson SL, Holley J, Lucock M. Developing a change model for peer worker interventions in mental health services: a qualitative research study. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2015 Oct;24(5):435-45. doi: 10.1017/S2045796014000407. Epub 2014 Jul 3. PubMed 24992284 ↗
  • Repper J, Carter T. A review of the literature on peer support in mental health services. J Ment Health. 2011 Aug;20(4):392-411. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2011.583947. PubMed 21770786 ↗
  • Walker G, Bryant W. Peer support in adult mental health services: a metasynthesis of qualitative findings. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2013 Mar;36(1):28-34. doi: 10.1037/h0094744. PubMed 23477647 ↗
  • Williams J, Leamy M, Pesola F, Bird V, Le Boutillier C, Slade M. Psychometric evaluation of the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR). Br J Psychiatry. 2015 Dec;207(6):551-5. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.114.161695. Epub 2015 Oct 8. PubMed 26450585 ↗
  • Chien WT, Clifton AV, Zhao S, Lui S. Peer support for people with schizophrenia or other serious mental illness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 4;4(4):CD010880. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010880.pub2. PubMed 30946482 ↗
  • Leamy M, Bird V, Le Boutillier C, Williams J, Slade M. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry. 2011 Dec;199(6):445-52. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.110.083733. PubMed 22130746 ↗
  • Law H, Neil ST, Dunn G, Morrison AP. Psychometric properties of the questionnaire about the process of recovery (QPR). Schizophr Res. 2014 Jul;156(2-3):184-9. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2014.04.011. Epub 2014 May 9. PubMed 24816049 ↗
  • Rogers ES, Chamberlin J, Ellison ML, Crean T. A consumer-constructed scale to measure empowerment among users of mental health services. Psychiatr Serv. 1997 Aug;48(8):1042-7. doi: 10.1176/ps.48.8.1042. PubMed 9255837 ↗
  • Rogers ES, Ralph RO, Salzer MS. Validating the empowerment scale with a multisite sample of consumers of mental health services. Psychiatr Serv. 2010 Sep;61(9):933-6. doi: 10.1176/ps.2010.61.9.933. PubMed 20810594 ↗
  • Bjorkman T, Svensson B. Quality of life in people with severe mental illness. Reliability and validity of the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). Nord J Psychiatry. 2005;59(4):302-6. doi: 10.1080/08039480500213733. PubMed 16195135 ↗
  • Priebe S, Huxley P, Knight S, Evans S. Application and results of the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). Int J Soc Psychiatry. 1999 Spring;45(1):7-12. doi: 10.1177/002076409904500102. PubMed 10443245 ↗
  • Thandi G, Fear NT, Chalder T. A comparison of the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) across different patient populations using Rasch analysis and exploratory factor analysis. J Psychosom Res. 2017 Jan;92:45-48. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2016.11.009. Epub 2016 Nov 30. PubMed 27998511 ↗
  • Luszczynska A, Scholz U, Schwarzer R. The general self-efficacy scale: multicultural validation studies. J Psychol. 2005 Sep;139(5):439-57. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.139.5.439-457. PubMed 16285214 ↗
  • Snyder CR, Sympson SC, Ybasco FC, Borders TF, Babyak MA, Higgins RL. Development and validation of the State Hope Scale. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996 Feb;70(2):321-35. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.70.2.321. PubMed 8636885 ↗
  • Hawley L, Gerber D, Pretz C, Morey C, Whiteneck G. Initial validation of personal self-advocacy measures for individuals with acquired brain injury. Rehabil Psychol. 2016 Aug;61(3):308-316. doi: 10.1037/rep0000093. Epub 2016 May 12. PubMed 27177213 ↗
  • Lund R, Nielsen LS, Henriksen PW, Schmidt L, Avlund K, Christensen U. Content validity and reliability of the Copenhagen social relations questionnaire. J Aging Health. 2014 Feb;26(1):128-50. doi: 10.1177/0898264313510033. PubMed 24584264 ↗
  • Deegan PE. The lived experience of using psychiatric medication in the recovery process and a shared decision-making program to support it. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2007 Summer;31(1):62-9. doi: 10.2975/31.1.2007.62.69. PubMed 17694717 ↗
  • Anthony WA. Recovery from mental illness: The guiding vision of the mental health service system in the 1990s. Psychosoc Rehabil J. 1993;16(4):11-23.
  • Poulsen CH, Egmose CH, Ebersbach BK, Hjorthoj C, Eplov LF. A community-based peer-support group intervention "Paths to EvERyday life" (PEER) added to service as usual for adults with vulnerability to mental health difficulties - a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2022 Sep 2;23(1):727. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06670-6. PubMed 36056407 ↗
  • Poulsen CH, Egmose CH, Ebersbach B, Hjorthoj C, Eplov LF. The "Paths to everyday life" peer support intervention for adults with mental health difficulties versus service as usual in a Danish community setting - results from a randomized two-armed, multi-site, superiority trial. BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Jul 11;25(1):695. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-07011-y. PubMed 40646520 ↗
  • Poulsen CH, Egmose CH, Bjorkedal SB, Eplov LF. Intervention delivery in the 'Paths to everyday life' (PEER) trial: a qualitative study of the perspectives of the peer volunteers with lived experiences of being in personal recovery of mental health difficulties. BMC Psychiatry. 2025 Jul 2;25(1):671. doi: 10.1186/s12888-025-06982-2. PubMed 40604516 ↗
  • Egmose CH, Poulsen CH, Bjorkedal SB, Eplov LF. The 'Paths to everyday life' (PEER) trial - a qualitative study of mechanisms of change from the perspectives of individuals with mental health difficulties participating in peer support groups led by volunteer peers. BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Aug 13;24(1):555. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-05992-w. PubMed 39138435 ↗

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The individual participant data that support the findings in this article will be made available after de-identification, along with the statistical analysis plan, upon reasonable request from researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal. To request access, proposals should be directed to the corresponding author. Data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement to gain access to the data. The register-based data cannot be provided on request because it is hosted by Statistics Denmark. The data was only accessible to researchers connected to the project, and it was not possible to download the final trial data set.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan

Time frame: The data will be available in 5 years from publication of the results.

Access criteria: To request access, proposals should be directed to the corresponding author. Data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement to gain access to the data.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Ran from Dec 2020 to primary completion in Mar 2023, 26 months.

Of 666 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Mental Disorders, half reached primary completion within 29 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 13 and three quarters within 45. This study's 26 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 680 studies reached it within 29 months; a quarter within 13 and three quarters within 45.

Mental Disorders covers many different conditions, not one, so the studies compared here vary widely. Read these figures as a rough guide.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Nov 13, 2020
First posted
Nov 20, 2020
StartActual
Dec 7, 2020
Primary completionActual
Mar 3, 2023
CompletionActual
Jun 26, 2023
Last update
Feb 4, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 4, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04639167
Lead sponsor
Amager Hospital
Collaborators
The Peer partnership association
Responsible party
Lene Falgaard Eplov (Head of Research, Associate professor, Amager Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Nov 20, 2020
Start date
Dec 7, 2020
Primary completion
Mar 3, 2023
Completion
Jun 26, 2023
Last update
Feb 4, 2026

Study contacts

Lene F Eplov, MD PhD
principal investigator · Mental Health Center Copenhagen

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion