Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23393613›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of psychotraumatology2013

Early psychosocial interventions after disasters, terrorism and other shocking events: is there a gap between norms and practice in Europe?

Hans Te Brake, Michel Dückers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of psychotraumatology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Stress at work: Self-monitoring of stressors and resources to support employees.Stress and health : journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hans Te BrakeImpact, National knowledge and advice centre for psychosocial care concerning critical incidents, Partner in Arq, Psychotrauma Expert Group, Diemen, The Netherlands.
Michel Dückers
Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternationally, several initiatives exist to describe standards for post-disaster psychosocial care.

objectiveThis study explored the level of consensus of experts within Europe on a set of recommendations on early psychosocial intervention after shocking events (Dutch guidelines), and to what degree these standards are implemented into mental health care practice.

methodsTwo hundred and six (mental) health care professionals filled out a questionnaire to assess the extent to which they consider the guidelines' scope and recommendations relevant and part of the regular practice in their own country. Forty-five European experts from 24 EU countries discussed the guidelines at an international seminar.

resultsThe data suggest overall agreement on the standards although many of the recommendations appear not (yet) to be embedded in everyday practice.

conclusionsAlthough large consensus exists on standards for early psychosocial care, a chasm between norms and practice appears to exist throughout the EU, stressing the general need for investments in guideline development and implementation.

Indexed as

cross-cultural comparisondisasterEarly psychosocial interventionspsychological assessmentshocking events

Identifiers

PMID23393613
PMCPMC3566377
OpenAlexW1993620333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.