Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29871616›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2018

Functional recovery in patients with schizophrenia: recommendations from a panel of experts.

Guillermo Lahera, José L Gálvez, Pedro Sánchez, Miguel Martínez-Roig, J V Pérez-Fuster, Paz García-Portilla, Berta Herrera, Miquel Roca

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Proportion and predictors of remission and recovery in first-episode psychosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Guillermo LaheraDepartamento de Medicina y Especialidades Médicas, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Alcalá, Plaza de San Diego, s/n, 28801 Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain.
José L GálvezUnidad de Salud Mental Comunitaria del Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocio, Av. Manuel Siurot, S/N, 41013, Sevilla, Spain.
Pedro SánchezUnidad de Psicosis Refractaria, Hospital Psiquiátrico de Álava-Osakidetza, C/ Álava, n°45, 01006, Vitoria - Gasteiz, Spain.
Miguel Martínez-RoigHospital Royo Villanova, Avda. San Gregorio, s/n, 50015, Zaragoza, Spain.
J V Pérez-FusterCentro de Salud Mental Fuente San Luis, Hospital Universitario Doctor Peset, Av. de Gaspar Aguilar, 90, 46017, València, Spain.
Paz García-PortillaCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Madrid, Spain.
Berta HerreraMedical Affairs Department, Janssen-Cilag, Avenida Partenón, 16 1 (Campo de las Naciones), S. A, 28042, Madrid, Spain.
Miquel RocaInstitut Universitari d'Investigació en Ciencies de la Salut (IUNIS), RedIAPP, Hospital Juan March, Universidad de las Islas Baleares, Cra. de Valldemossa, km 7.5., Palma de Mallorca, (Illes Balears), Spain. mroca@uib.es.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe management of schizophrenia is evolving towards a more comprehensive model based on functional recovery. The concept of functional recovery goes beyond clinical remission and encompasses multiple aspects of the patient's life, making it difficult to settle on a definition and to develop reliable assessment criteria. In this consensus process based on a panel of experts in schizophrenia, we aimed to provide useful insights on functional recovery and its involvement in clinical practice and clinical research.

methodsAfter a literature review of functional recovery in schizophrenia, a scientific committee of 8 members prepared a 75-item questionnaire, including 6 sections: (I) the concept of functional recovery (9 items), (II) assessment of functional recovery (23 items), (III) factors influencing functional recovery (16 items), (IV) psychosocial interventions and functional recovery (8 items), (V) pharmacological treatment and functional recovery (14 items), and (VI) the perspective of patients and their relatives on functional recovery (5 items). The questionnaire was sent to a panel of 53 experts, who rated each item on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was achieved in a 2-round Delphi dynamics, using the median (interquartile range) scores to consider consensus in either agreement (scores 7-9) or disagreement (scores 1-3). Items not achieving consensus in the first round were sent back to the experts for a second consideration.

resultsAfter the two recursive rounds, consensus was achieved in 64 items (85.3%): 61 items (81.3%) in agreement and 3 (4.0%) in disagreement, all of them from section II (assessment of functional recovery). Items not reaching consensus were related to the concepts of functional recovery (1 item, 1.3%), functional assessment (5 items, 6.7%), factors influencing functional recovery (3 items, 4.0%), and psychosocial interventions (2 items, 5.6%).

conclusionsDespite the lack of a well-defined concept of functional recovery, we identified a trend towards a common archetype of the definition and factors associated with functional recovery, as well as its applicability in clinical practice and clinical research.

Indexed as

Recovery of FunctionSchizophreniaAntipsychotic AgentsConsensusDelphi TechniqueHumansPsychiatric RehabilitationRemission InductionSurveys and QuestionnairesAntipsychotic AgentsAntipsychotic agentsFunctional recoveryPsychosocial therapySchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID29871616
PMCPMC5989342

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.