Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26440520›Full record

ReviewDer Nervenarzt2015

[Innovative patient-centered care systems: International perspectives].

F U Lang, U Gühne, S G Riedel-Heller, T Becker

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. [Elderly patients with early onset mental illness].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. 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.

F U LangKlinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie II, Universität Ulm, Bezirkskrankenhaus Günzburg, Ludwig-Heilmeyer-Str. 2, 89312, Günzburg, Deutschland. fabian.lang@uni-ulm.de.
U GühneInstitut für Sozialmedizin, Arbeitsmedizin und Public Health (ISAP), Medizinische Fakultät, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Deutschland.
S G Riedel-HellerInstitut für Sozialmedizin, Arbeitsmedizin und Public Health (ISAP), Medizinische Fakultät, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Deutschland.
T BeckerKlinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie II, Universität Ulm, Bezirkskrankenhaus Günzburg, Ludwig-Heilmeyer-Str. 2, 89312, Günzburg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe "Psychiatrie-Enquete" (German Report on the State of Psychiatry) is 40 years old this year. It has always been inspirational; also internationally.

objectiveWhich innovative elements of community mental health services can be found in an international perspective? MATERIALS AND

methodsNarrative review.

resultsCommunity mental health care is a lively field with much research and innovative practice. With assertive community treatment (ACT) and home treatment (HT), internationally well-evaluated forms of community mental health care are available.

conclusionRecovery-based and peer-to-peer approaches hold promise for the future. In terms of mid- and long-term perspectives, an increase in patient-centering via individualization of mental health care and a better implementation of community mental health interventions would be desirable in Germany.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesDelivery of Health CareGermanyGlobal HealthHumansInternationalityMental DisordersNeurologyOrganizational InnovationPatient-Centered CareAssertive community treatmentCommunity mental health careHome treatmentPeer-to-peer approachRecovery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.