ArticleBMJ open2017
Cross-sector user and provider perceptions on experiences of shared-care clozapine: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic literature review of pharmacists in general practice in supporting the implementation of shared care agreements in primary care.Systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- A realist review of medication optimisation of community dwelling service users with serious mental illness.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Review
- What are patients' experiences of discontinuing clozapine and how does this impact their views on subsequent treatment?BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- A qualitative exploration of the barriers to and facilitators of clozapine monitoring in a secure psychiatric setting.BJPsych bulletin · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives(1) To explore individual perceptions on experiences of people receiving and/or delivering a shared-care clozapine serviceand (2) to gain an understanding of effectiveness and acceptability of shared-care clozapine.
designInterpretative phenomenological analysis guided the delivery and analysis of a semistructured interview and focus group study designed to explore participant experience of shared-care clozapine. Ethical approval 13/EM/0286 was gained in July 2013 from East Midlands
participantsEight stakeholder groups from Adult and Forensic Mental Health involved in shared-care clozapine provision delivered in primary care were identified for recruitment from one mental health trust in England (six different groups of healthcare professionals (HCPs), clozapine service users (CSUs) and their carers). To be eligible for recruitment, all potential participants had to be either providing, receiving or the carer of a person receiving clozapine by shared care.
results32 HCPs and 6 CSUs were recruited and 14 interviews and 6 participant homogenous focus groups were run. Four shared superordinate themes were identified: Clozapine Process, The Sharing of Care, The Provision of Care and Multi-professional Relationships. Differences between Adult and Forensic engagement in shared care were noted and both HCP and CSU relationships were mapped to the Wish conceptual framework of relationships to provide insight into how shared-care clozapine can provide a mechanism for provision of person-centred care, which was present in the Forensic HCP
conclusionsThe Forensic HCP/CSU relationship demonstrated how cross-sector working through shared-care clozapine can provide a mechanism for provision of person-centred care by enabling a person-centred focus to care delivery which supported CSUs to live as independently as possible. Person-centred care demonstrably improves patient care outcomes and wider implementation of shared-care clozapine could provide greater integration of people with serious mental illness and reduce stigma within the community while improving patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.