ArticleBMC research notes2011
DUNDRUM-2: Prospective validation of a structured professional judgment instrument assessing priority for admission from the waiting list for a forensic mental health hospital.
Article in BMC research notes, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Italian Evaluation and Excellence in REMS (ITAL-EE-REMS): appropriate placement of forensic patients in REMS forensic facilities.International journal of mental health systems · 2024Article
- Examining the need for a high level of therapeutic security at a regional forensic mental health service in Aotearoa New Zealand.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2024Article
- Article
- Forensic psychiatry and Covid-19: accelerating transformation in forensic psychiatry.Irish journal of psychological medicine · 2021Article
- Outcome measures of risk and recovery in Broadmoor High Secure Forensic Hospital: stratification of care pathways and moves to medium secure hospitals.BJPsych open · 2020Article
- Security needs among patients referred for high secure care in Broadmoor Hospital England.BJPsych open · 2020Article
- Assessment of need for inpatient treatment for mental disorder among female prisoners: a cross-sectional study of provincially detained women in Ontario.BMC psychiatry · 2019Article
- Perspective On Excellence in Forensic Mental Health Services: What We Can Learn From Oncology and Other Medical Services.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2019Article
- Prospective observational cohort study of 'treatment as usual' over four years for patients with schizophrenia in a national forensic hospital.BMC psychiatry · 2018Observational
- The risks, needs and stages of recovery of a complete forensic patient cohort in an Australian state.BMC psychiatry · 2018Article
- Modern forensic psychiatric hospital design: clinical, legal and structural aspects.International journal of mental health systems · 2018Review
- Beyond the Walls: An Evaluation of a Pre-Release Planning (PReP) Programme for Sentenced Mentally Disordered Offenders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2018Article
- STRESS-testing clinical activity and outcomes for a combined prison in-reach and court liaison service: a 3-year observational study of 6177 consecutive male remands.International journal of mental health systems · 2016Article
- Factors affecting length of stay in forensic hospital setting: need for therapeutic security and course of admission.BMC psychiatry · 2015Article
- Triage, decision-making and follow-up of patients referred to a UK forensic service: validation of the DUNDRUM toolkit.BMC psychiatry · 2015Article
- Older men and older women remand prisoners: mental illness, physical illness, offending patterns and needs.International psychogeriatrics · 2015Article
- Recovery and concordance in a secure forensic psychiatry hospital - the self rated DUNDRUM-3 programme completion and DUNDRUM-4 recovery scales.BMC psychiatry · 2015Observational
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe criteria for deciding who should be admitted first from a waiting list to a forensic secure hospital are not necessarily the same as those for assessing need. Criteria were drafted qualitatively and tested in a prospective 'real life' observational study over a 6-month period.
methodsA researcher rated all those presented at the weekly referrals meeting using the DUNDRUM-1 triage security scale and the DUNDRUM-2 triage urgency scale. The key outcome measure was whether or not the individual was admitted.
resultsInter-rater reliability and internal consistency for the DUNDRUM-2 were acceptable. The DUNDRUM-1 triage security score and the DUNDRUM-2 triage urgency score correlated r = 0.663. At the time of admission, after a mean of 23.9 (SD35.9) days on the waiting list, those admitted had higher scores on the DUNDRUM-2 triage urgency scale than those not admitted, with no significant difference between locations (remand or sentenced prisoners, less secure hospitals) at the time of admission. Those admitted also had higher DUNDRUM-1 triage security scores. At baseline the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for a combined score was the best predictor of admission while at the time of admission the DUNDRUM-2 triage urgency score had the largest AUC (0.912, 95% CI 0.838 to 0.986).
conclusionsThe triage urgency items and scale add predictive power to the decision to admit. This is particularly true in maintaining equitability between those referred from different locations.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.