Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31453395›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2019

PSYCHLOPS in Polish primary care: how do clients conceptualise their problems on a patient-generated outcome measure?

Maria Kordowicz, Slawomir Czachowski, Peter Schofield, Mark Ashworth

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria KordowiczSchool of Population Health & Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Slawomir CzachowskiNicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland.
Peter SchofieldSchool of Population Health & Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Mark AshworthSchool of Population Health & Environmental Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBNicolaus Copernicus University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPSYCHLOPS, a patient-generated mental health outcome questionnaire, invites clients to describe the problem that troubles them most. PSYCHLOPS was utilised in Polish primary care in the context of a brief CBT-based intervention for mild to moderate mental health problems.

aimTo explore how patients conceptualise their problems and the consequences of these problems with the aid of PSYCHLOPS.

method243 patients were recruited from a primary care setting; 241 completed PSYCHLOPS. Free-text data were obtained from the Problem and Function domains of PSYCHLOPS, blind translated into English and independently analysed using a pre-existing thematic framework. A total of 780 free-text responses were analysed.

resultsThe most commonly reported responses to the pre-therapy Problem domain category were "somatic" (denoting responses relating to physical health); the most common responses to the Function domain category were "competence/performance" (denoting responses relating to the respondents' perceived ability to achieve, cope, function). Compared with pre-therapy Problem 1 domain categories, during-therapy responses revealed a higher proportion of the "interpersonal" category (denoting responses relating to social relationships) and a lower proportion of the "somatic" category.

conclusionsDespite the brevity of clients' responses, PSYCHLOPS allowed an insight into patients' most troubling problems and their consequences. Possible reasons underlying the transition from a somatic to an interpersonal problem reporting during the course of talking therapy are discussed.

Indexed as

Clinical psychologyDepressionGeneral practiceMental healthPolandPrimary carePROMPsychiatryPsychology

Identifiers

PMID31453395
PMCPMC6700419
OpenAlexW2968206430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.