Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25767558›Full record

ArticleClinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH2015

Flexible ACT & Resource-group ACT: Different Working Procedures Which Can Supplement and Strengthen Each Other. A Response.

Remmers van Veldhuizen, Philippe Delespaul, Hans Kroon, Niels Mulder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health : CP & EMH, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Remmers van VeldhuizenCCAF (Certification Centre for ACT and FACT), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Philippe DelespaulInnovations in Mental Health Care, Maastricht University and Mondriaan (Mental Health Service), The Netherlands.
Hans KroonReintegration and Community Care, Trimbos Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Niels MulderPublic Mental Health, Epidemiological and Social Psychiatric Research institute, Erasmus MC; Parnassia Psychiatric Institute, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article is a response to Nordén and Norlander's 'Absence of Positive Results for Flexible Assertive Community Treatment. What is the next approach?'[1], in which they assert that 'at present [there is] no evidence for Flexible ACT and… that RACT might be able to provide new impulses and new vitality to the treatment mode of ACT'. We question their analyses and conclusions. We clarify Flexible ACT, referring to the Flexible Assertive Community Treatment Manual (van Veldhuizen, 2013) [2] to rectify misconceptions. We discuss Nordén and Norlander's interpretation of research on Flexible ACT. The fact that too little research has been done and that there are insufficient positive results cannot serve as a reason to propagate RACT. However, the Resource Group method does provide inspiration for working with clients to involve their networks more effectively in Flexible ACT.

Indexed as

ACTcommunity careFACTflexible ACTRACTresource ACT

Identifiers

PMID25767558
PMCPMC4353123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.