Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34769647›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Improving Customisation in Clinical Pathways by Using a Modular Perspective.

Anne van Dam, Margot Metz, Bert Meijboom

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anne van DamMcCoy & Partners, Torenallee 45, 5617 BA Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Margot MetzGGz Breburg, Specialist Mental Health Care Organisation, P.O. Box 770, 5000 AT Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Bert MeijboomScientific Centre Tranzo, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A standardised system of clinical pathways often conflicts with providing patient-centred heterogeneous care. Mental health care organisations are searching for new methods to become responsive towards unique treatment needs. Modularity is a method increasingly suggested to reconcile standardisation and customisation. The aim is to investigate the extent to which modularity can be applied to make clinical pathways in specialist mental health care more flexible in order to stimulate shared decision making (SDM) and thereby customise care processes to patient contexts while maintaining evidence-based standards. Methods consist of literature research and a theory-based case study including document analysis and semi-structured interviews, which were performed at a Dutch specialist mental health care organisation. The results show that in current literature two modularity-based structures are proposed that support flexibility and customisation, i.e., 'Prototype' and 'Menu-based'. This study reveals that departments tend to use the prototype method if they have predictable patient needs, evidence-based methods are available and there is sequency in treatment components. The menu-based method is preferred if there are unpredictable needs, or the evidence needed to create interconnectedness in treatment is lacking. In conclusion, prototype or menu-based methods are both suitable for applying SDM and reaching customisation in practice. The choice is determined by three characteristics: predictability of needs, availability of evidence and the interconnectedness of treatment components.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysDecision Making, SharedCase-Control StudiesDecision MakingHumansPatient-Centered CarePatient Participationclinical guidelinesevidence-based practicemodularitypatient-centred careshared decision makingspecialist mental health care

Identifiers

PMID34769647
PMCPMC8583020

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.