ArticleBMJ open2021
Measurement-based care educational programmes for clinical trainees in mental healthcare: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Quantifying care, qualifying experiences: a systematic review of measurement-based care in psychiatry from patient and provider perspectives.BMJ mental health · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Educating Mental Health Trainees About Measurement-Based Care: A Scoping Review.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2023Article
- Study What You Do: Developing a Psychotherapy Tracking Database in a Large-Scale Integrated Behavioral Health Service.Annals of family medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMeasurement-based care (MBC) represents the approach of regularly using symptom rating scales to guide patient care decisions in mental healthcare. MBC is an effective, feasible and acceptable approach to enhance clinical outcomes in various disciplines, including medicine, psychology, social work and psychotherapy. Yet, it is infrequently used by clinicians, potentially due to limited education for care providers. The objective of this scoping review is to survey the characteristics of MBC educational programmes for undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate clinical trainees in mental healthcare. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using database-tailored search strategies, we plan on searching Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Central for relevant studies. Thereafter, we will analyse the selected studies to extract information on the delivery of educational programmes, the clinical and educational outcomes of these programmes, and the potential enablers and barriers to MBC education. In this paper, we articulate the protocol for this scoping review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review does not require research ethics approval. The findings from this scoping review will be incorporated into the creation of a novel MBC curriculum and handbook. Results will be disseminated at appropriate national or international conferences, as well as in a peer-reviewed journal publication.
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.