Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31527872›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Factors influencing the admission decision for Medical Psychiatry Units: A concept mapping approach.

P J Caarls, M A van Schijndel, G van den Berk, A D Boenink, D Boerman, J G Lijmer, A Honig, M Terra, A Thijs, B Verwey and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Defining Vision and Mission of a Medical Psychiatry Unit (MPU) for Older Adults: A Focus Group Study.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financing
    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

14 authors.

P J CaarlsErasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0655-4584
M A van SchijndelErasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
G van den BerkOnze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A D BoeninkAmsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9791-8800
D BoermanRijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
J G LijmerOnze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A HonigOnze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M TerraAmsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A ThijsAmsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
B VerweyRijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
J A van WaardeRijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
J van WijngaardenErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
J J van BusschbachErasmus Medical Center, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
MPU Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMedical Psychiatry Units (MPUs), also known as Complexity Intervention Units (CIUs), provide care for complex patients suffering from both psychiatric and physical disorders. Because there is no consensus on the indications for admission to an MPU, daily practice and effectiveness research are hampered. This study therefore used a concept mapping approach to investigate which organizational and medical factors determine the decision to admit a patient to an MPU.

methodsThe first step of the concept mapping approach was to create a list of factors determining MPU admission from literature. Secondly, clinical experts sorted and ranked these factors. The sorted and ranked data were then analyzed, and a draft conceptual framework was created. A final conceptual MPU admission framework was then drawn during an expert consensus meeting and recommendations for implementation were suggested.

resultsThirteen clinical experts defined 90 factors from literature, which were sorted and ranked by 40 experts from 21 Dutch hospitals. This concept mapping approach resulted in a five-cluster solution for an MPU admission framework based on: 1. Staff competencies and organizational pre-requisites; 2. Patient context; 3. Patient characteristics; 4. Medical needs and capabilities; and 5. Psychiatric symptoms and behavioral problems. Furthermore, three inclusion and two exclusion criteria were formulated to help the clinicians decide whether or not to admit patients to an MPU. These criteria can be implemented in daily practice.

conclusionImplementing the five criteria derived from this conceptual framework will help make the admission decision for complex patients with psychiatric and physical disorders to an MPU more correct, consistent, and transparent.

Indexed as

Patient AdmissionPsychiatric Department, HospitalDecision Making, OrganizationalExpert TestimonyHospitalizationHumansMedicineNetherlandsPsychiatrySystems Analysis

Identifiers

PMID31527872
PMCPMC6748432

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.