ArticleDer Nervenarzt2021
[Personnel assessment in psychiatry and psychotherapy : Results of a feasibility study on the platform model].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2021. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The topic of personnel assessment in psychiatry, psychotherapy and psychosomatics is currently of great importance in terms of health policy. Sufficient empirical evidence for the development of a comprehensive system for staffing is not yet available. The platform model developed by the psychiatric psychosomatic societies and associations pursues a combined empirical normative approach for a future-oriented assessment instrument for the various professional groups. The concept presented has been proven in the health policy discussion as a sensible system of comprehensive personnel assessment; however, an empirically sound control is still lacking as to whether this system can be used practically for the task described and thus can withstand the task of a resilient and future-proof measurement instrument for the necessary personnel. The task of the present study was to examine the extent to which the assumptions of the platform model are confirmed, whether methodological indications can be identified and whether there are limitations of the study that can be used in the validation and foundation of the model. The study confirmed the feasibility of the model and refers to a number of methodological findings and limitations that can be used for the further development of the model. The developed model allows the necessary staffing to be derived and justified, regardless of diagnoses and settings. It is future-oriented and dynamic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32880658What 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.