ArticleBrain and behavior2020
Test-retest reliability of the Italian version of the M-BACK questionnaire to assess the barriers, attitudes, confidence, and knowledge of mental health staff regarding metabolic health of psychiatric patients.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe Metabolic-Barriers, Attitudes, Confidence, and Knowledge Questionnaire (M-BACK) was developed to determine the barriers, attitudes, confidence, and knowledge of mental health practitioners regarding the metabolic health of patients in order to determine the efficacy of targeted training interventions. This study aimed to validate the Italian version of M-BACK questionnaire (M-BACK-IT) and to determine the test-retest reliability.
methodsThe M-BACK questionnaire was translated into Italian and back-translated using an established protocol. In order to determine the test-retest reliability of the instrument, mental health professionals were recruited from a private psychiatric hospital located in northeast Italy and completed the questionnaire on two separate occasions, seven days apart. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for the total score, as well as each of the four M-BACK domains.
resultsThirty mental health professionals (4 psychiatrists, 9 psychologists, 12 nurses, and 5 exercise specialists) completed the M-BACK-IT. ICCs ranged from 0.58 to 0.94.
conclusionsThe test-retest reliability of the M-BACK-IT demonstrated comparable results to the English version. The M-BACK-IT is a reliable measure to assess key elements of practitioners' perceptions of the barriers, their knowledge, attitudes, and confidence regarding metabolic monitoring and intervention in people with mental illness.
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.