ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
An Integrated Account of Expert Perspectives on Functioning in Schizophrenia.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of the Comprehensive and Brief International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Core Sets for Schizophrenia from the Perspective of Individuals Diagnosed with the Disorder: A Worldwide Study Using Focus Groups.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Network Analysis of the Brief ICF Core Set for Schizophrenia.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An integrated and interdisciplinary care system for individuals with schizophrenia is essential, which implies the need for a tool that assesses the difficulties and contextual factors of relevance to their functioning, and facilitates coordinated working across the different professions involved in their care. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Core Sets (ICF-CS) cover these requirements. This study aimed to evaluate the content validity of the ICF-CSs for schizophrenia from the perspective of experts. Six three-round Delphi studies were conducted with expert panels from different professional backgrounds which have played a significant role in the treatment of individuals with schizophrenia (psychiatry, psychology, nursing, occupational therapy, social work and physiotherapy). In total, 790 experts from 85 different countries participated in the first round. In total, 90 ICF categories and 28 Personal factors reached expert consensus (reached consensus from four or more professional perspectives). All the categories in the brief version of the ICF-CS for schizophrenia reached consensus from all the professional perspectives considered. As for the comprehensive version, 89.7% of its categories reached expert consensus. The results support the worldwide content validity of the ICF-CSs for schizophrenia from an expert perspective and underline the importance of assessing functioning by considering all the components implied.
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.