Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27247676›Full record

ReviewEurope's journal of psychology2015

Improving Patient Outcomes: Effectively Training Healthcare Staff in Psychological Practice Skills: A Mixed Systematic Literature Review.

Katherine Garzonis, Eryn Mann, Aleksandra Wyrzykowska, Pavlo Kanellakis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Europe's journal of psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Service user involvement in the coproduction of a mental health nursing metric: The Therapeutic Engagement Questionnaire.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2017
    Article
  14. Review
  15. 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.

Katherine GarzonisDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Eryn MannSaint Andrew's Healthcare, Northampton, United Kingdom.
Aleksandra WyrzykowskaDepartment of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Pavlo KanellakisKanellakis and Associates, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Training is an important part of modern European healthcare services and is often cited as a way to improve care quality. To date, various training methods have been used to impart skills relevant to psychological practice in a variety of mental health professionals. However, patient outcomes are rarely used in evaluating the effectiveness of the different training methods used, making it difficult to assess true utility. In the present review, we consider methods of training that can effectively impact trainee and patient outcomes. To do so, PubMed, PsycNET, Scopus, CENTRAL and ERIC were searched for studies on training of healthcare staff in psychological practice approaches. In total, 24 studies were identified (16 quantitative and 8 qualitative). For the most part, group, individual, and web-based training was used. A variety of health professionals were trained in skills including 'communication', 'diagnosis', and 'referral' to name but a few. In the majority of studies staff skill level improved. These findings hold implications for the design, implementation, and evaluation of training for mental healthcare staff.

Indexed as

communicationgeneral practitionersmental health professionalsmultidisciplinary teamnursesprofessional developmentpsychologyskillstraining

Identifiers

PMID27247676
PMCPMC4873062

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.