Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30792803›Full record

ArticleChild and adolescent psychiatry and mental health2019

Clinicians' attitudes toward standardized assessment and diagnosis within child and adolescent psychiatry.

M Danielson, A Månsdotter, E Fransson, S Dalsgaard, J-O Larsson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

M Danielson1Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5145-3347
A Månsdotter3Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, 901 87 Umeå, Sweden.
E Fransson4Centre for Health Equity Studies, Department of Public Health Sciences, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9010-8522
S Dalsgaard6The National Centre for Register-based Research (NCRR) and Centre for Integrated Register-based Research at AU (CIRRAU), Aarhus University, Fuglesangs Alle 4, 8210 Aarhus V, Denmark.
J-O Larsson1Department of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden.
Stockholm County Council · SEAarhus University · DKStockholm University · SEUmeå University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a strong call for clinically useful standardized assessment tools in everyday child and adolescent psychiatric practice. The attitudes of clinicians have been raised as a key-facilitating factor when implementing new methods. An explorative study was conducted aimed to investigate the clinicians' attitudes regarding standardized assessments and usefulness of diagnoses in treatment planning.

methods411 mental health service personnel working with outpatient and inpatient assessment and treatment within the specialist child and adolescent mental health services, Stockholm County Council were asked to participate in the study, of which 345 (84%) agreed answer a questionnaire. The questionnaire included questions regarding Attitudes toward Standardized Assessment and Utility of Diagnosis. Descriptive analyses were performed and four subscales were compared with information from a similar study in US using the same instruments. The demographic and professional characteristics (age, working years, gender, education, profession, management position, involvement in assessment, level of service) in terms of prediction of attitudes were studied by univariate and multivariate linear regressions.

resultsOverall, the clinicians had quite positive attitudes and were more positive compared to a similar study conducted in the US earlier. There were differences in attitudes due to several characteristics but the only characteristic predicting all subscales was type of profession (counselor, nurse, psychiatrist, psychologist, other), with counselors being less positive than other groups.

conclusionThe overall positive attitudes toward standard assessment are of importance in the development of evidence-based practice and our study implies that clinicians in general value and are willing to use standardized assessment. Nevertheless, there are specific issues such as adequate training and available translated assessment instrument that need to be addressed. When implementing new methods in practice, there are general as well as specific resistances that need to be overcome. Studies in different cultural settings are of importance to further extend the knowledge of what is general and what is specific barriers.

Indexed as

ImplementationMental health serviceStandardized assessmentUtility

Identifiers

PMID30792803
PMCPMC6371426
OpenAlexW2925586094

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.