ArticleThe Ulster medical journal2016
Electroconvulsive Therapy - What Do Patients Think Of Their Treatment?
Article in The Ulster medical journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A meta-review of literature reviews assessing the capacity of patients with severe mental disorders to make decisions about their healthcare.BMC psychiatry · 2020Review
- Junior medical students' knowledge about and attitudes towards electroconvulsive therapy in a South African setting.The South African journal of psychiatry : SAJP : the journal of the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa · 2017Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Regulation and Quality Improvement Authority (RQIA) monitors the administration of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in Northern Ireland (NI). As part of their inspection methodology RQIA wished to include feedback from ECT patients. The aim of this report is to summarise the opinions of ECT patients over a 1-year period and to compare their feedback about treatment with the standards of best practice, as defined by the Electroconvulsive Therapy Accreditation Service (ECTAS).
methodRQIA was granted permission to use the ECTAS patient questionnaire. The questionnaire was distributed to all the ECT clinics in NI and staff were requested to give them to patients who had received a course of ECT.
resultsA total of 42 individuals returned questionnaires, 24 females (57.1%) and 18 (42.9%) males. The response rate was 26%. Almost half of respondents were detained under the Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 (n=19, 45.2%), with one third receiving ECT as a day patient (n=14, 33.3%). Respondents reported having detailed information about ECT, with ECTAS standards 4.2 and 4.3 being affirmed in over 80% of cases. Eighty percent of respondents (n=34) believed they benefited from ECT.
conclusionThe results are mainly favourable towards ECT. The majority felt they benefited from treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27698521PMC5031106W2561236066What 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.