ArticleFocus (American Psychiatric Publishing)2019
Bringing Neuroscience to the Bedside.
Article in Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Clinical Neuroscience Continuing Education for Psychiatrists.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2023Article
- Psychosocial Basis of Human Sufferings and Poverty in Patients with Neurological and Psychiatric Disorders.Medical research archives · 2023Article
- Integrating Neuroscience Into Clinical Practice: Current Opinions and Dialogue Between Drs. Jacqueline Persons and Kerry Ressler.The Behavior therapist · 2021Article
- Same Material, Different Formats: Comparing In-Person and Distance Learning in Undergraduate Medical Education.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2020Article
- Electroconvulsive Therapy for Patients with Catatonia: Current Perspectives.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2020Review
- Neuroscience-Informed Therapies in Psychiatry.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2019Article
- How Neuroscience Is Informing Treatments: Ethical Issues.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical psychiatry has not historically expected practitioners to learn the basic science of psychiatric illness. Despite wide recognition that all effective psychiatric treatments have neurophysiological mechanisms, the field has struggled to integrate concepts of the mind and brain. Because of historical separations of clinical psychiatry and evolving neuroscience research, many psychiatric residency programs feel underresourced to teach clinically relevant neuroscience, and current residency graduates are not being prepared to integrate neuroscience findings into their practice. Significant strides have been made in the understanding of the neurobiology of psychiatric disorders. Similarly, the neurobiological mechanisms of a wide variety of treatments have been elucidated, spanning interventions from psychotherapy to physical exercise, electroconvulsive therapy, and modern neuromodulation techniques. The authors discuss strategies for integrating the language of clinical neuroscience into everyday psychiatric practice and review resources available to clinicians and trainees to help them acquire and practice these skills.
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.