Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28243465›Full record

ReviewBJPsych open2017

A systematic review and synthesis of outcome domains for use within forensic services for people with intellectual disabilities.

Catrin Morrissey, Peter E Langdon, Nicole Geach, Verity Chester, Michael Ferriter, William R Lindsay, Jane McCarthy, John Devapriam, Dawn-Marie Walker, Conor Duggan and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BJPsych open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Defendants with intellectual disability and autism spectrum conditions: the perspective of clinicians working across three jurisdictions.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. BJPsych open · 2020
    Article
  10. "Moving on" through the locked ward system for women with intellectual disabilities.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors.

Catrin Morrissey, PhD, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, and Complex and Forensic Service, Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Lincoln, UK.
Peter E Langdon, PhD, Tizard Centre, University of Kent, Canterbury, and Broadland Clinic, Hertfordshire Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust in Norfolk, Norwich, UK.
Nicole Geach, MRes, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Verity Chester, MSc, Department of Psychiatry, Partnerships in Care, Norfolk, and Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Michael Ferriter, PhD, [Retired from] Forensic Division, Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
William R Lindsay, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of the West of Scotland, UK, and Department of Psychology, The Danshell Group, UK.
Jane McCarthy, FRCPsych, Department of Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences (FANS), Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
John Devapriam, FRCPsych, Department of Psychiatry, Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, Leicester, and Care Quality Commission, London, UK.
Dawn-Marie Walker, PhD, Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Conor Duggan, OBE, FRCPsych, Institute of Mental Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Regi Alexander, FRCPsych, Department of Psychiatry, Partnerships in Care, Department of Psychiatry, Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, and Department of Psychiatry, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

Funding

Department of Health HS&DR/13/114/37Department of Health PB-PG-0214-33040Department of Health PDF-2011-04-040
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited empirical information on service-level outcome domains and indicators for the large number of people with intellectual disabilities being treated in forensic psychiatric hospitals.

aimsThis study identified and developed the domains that should be used to measure treatment outcomes for this population.

methodA systematic review of the literature highlighted 60 studies which met eligibility criteria; they were synthesised using content analysis. The findings were refined within a consultation and consensus exercises with carers, patients and experts.

resultsThe final framework encompassed three

conclusionsTo index recovery, services need to measure treatment outcomes using this framework. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None. COPYRIGHT AND USAGE: © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2017. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence.

Identifiers

PMID28243465
PMCPMC5303894

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.