ArticleInternational journal of integrated care2018
The Reality of Uncertainty in Mental Health Care Settings Seeking Professional Integration: A Mixed-Methods Approach.
Article in International journal of integrated care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mind the gap: a review of optimisation in mental healthcare service delivery.Health systems (Basingstoke, England) · 2023Review
- Stakeholder identified research priorities for early intervention in psychosis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Missed nursing care and complexity theory: a conceptual paper.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2021Article
- Distributive Leadership Within an Emerging Network of Integrated Youth Health Centres: A Case Study of Foundry.International journal of integrated care · 2020Article
- Developing Interpersonal Trust Between Service Users and Professionals in Integrated Services: Compensating for Latent Distrust, Vulnerabilities and Uncertainty Shaped by Organisational Context.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUncertainty is a common experience in the complex adaptive health system, particularly amongst mental health professionals structured for the delivery of integrated care. Increased understanding of uncertainty will not necessarily make things more certain, but can act to sensitize professionals to the challenges they face. The aim of this study is to examine the types and situations of uncertainty experienced by professionals working in a mental health setting based on an integrated care model. The research assesses the impact of experience and professional group on reported uncertainties.
methodsFirst, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with clinical and non-clinical staff to examine uncertainties experienced by professionals working in headspace centres in Australia. Second, an online survey was conducted to quantify the experiences of uncertainty and explore associations.
resultsFindings revealed three overarching and largely interrelated aspects of uncertainty, namely: decision-making; professional role; and external factors. Most commonly, staff reported experiences of uncertainty pertaining to deciding to accept a client into the service and then deciding how to treat them. This is often due to arbitrary, or overly-restrictive criteria in integrated care. Findings also suggested that uncertainty does not necessarily decline with experience and there were no significant differences in levels of uncertainty between clinical and non-clinical staff.
conclusionsThis study highlights the importance of acknowledging uncertainties and actively clarifying role ambiguities when working alongside diverse professionals in mental health care.
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.