ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2021
Shared Decision Making With Young People at Ultra High Risk of Psychotic Disorder.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Mobile App Designed to Promote Shared Decision-Making in the Treatment of Psychotic Disorders: Feasibility and Acceptability Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Intensive Outreach for Mental Health: Young People's Experiences of an Intensive Outreach Model on Recovery and Engagement.Community mental health journal · 2025Article
- Preferences for Psychological Therapy or Support Within an ARMS Psychological Therapies Trial: The Importance of Targeted Intervention for Unusual Sensory Experiences.Early intervention in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Developing a spectrum model of engagement in services for first episode psychosis: beyond attendance.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Experiencing (Shared) Decision Making: Results from a Qualitative Study of People with Mental Illness and Their Family Members.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Psychoeducation for individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis: A scoping review.Schizophrenia research · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.