ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Needs and Experiences in Psychiatric Treatment (NEPT)- Piloting a Collaboratively Generated, Initial Research Tool to Evaluate Cross-Sectoral Mental Health Services.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Facilitating transition between adolescent and adult psychiatry: patient and parent experiences from a jointly run ward for 16-25-year-olds in Germany.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2026Article
- [Measuring patient experiences in healthcare-overview of methods and the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT) as an example].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Review
- Difference and subordination - the epistemic struggles of collaborative knowledge production in the field of mental health.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- How to measure staff continuity in intensive psychiatric home treatment: a routine data and single case analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- [Flexible and integrative treatment in psychiatry: implementation of specific care components at model and standard care clinics in Germany (PsychCare study)].Der Nervenarzt · 2022Article
- Supported Employment, Participation at Work, and Peer Support: A Qualitative, Participatory Case Study Report of the Geesthacht Model.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Designed to Clash? Reflecting on the Practical, Personal, and Structural Challenges of Collaborative Research in Psychiatry.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch tools to evaluate institutions or interventions in the field of mental health have rarely been constructed by researchers with personal experience of using the mental health system ("experiential expertise"). This paper presents a preliminary tool that has been developed within a participatory-collaborative process evaluation as part of a controlled, multi-center, prospective cohort study (PsychCare) to evaluate psychiatric flexible and integrative treatment, FIT for short, models in Germany.
methodThe collaborative research team consisting of researchers with and without experiential expertise developed 12 experiential program components of FIT models by an iterative research process based on the Grounded Theory Methodology. These components were transformed into a preliminary research tool that was evaluated by a participatory expert panel, and during a pilot and validation study, the latter using a random sample of 327 users from 14 mental health departments. Internal consistency of the tool was tested using Cronbach's alpha. Construct validity was evaluated using a Principal Components Analysis (PCA) and a Jonckheere Terpstra test in relation to different implementation levels of the FIT model. Concurrent validity was tested against a German version of the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (ZUF-8) using correlation analysis and a linear regression model.
resultsThe evaluation of the expert panel reduced 29 initial items to 16 that were further reduced to 11 items during the pilot study, resulting into a research tool (Needs and Experiences in Psychiatric Treatment-NEPT) that demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha of 0.89). PCA yielded a 1-component structure, which accounted for 49% of the total variance supporting the unidimensional structure of the tool. The total NEPT score increased alongside the increasing implementation of the FIT model (
conclusionsThe NEPT tool seems to be promising for further development to assess the experiences with and fulfillment of needs of psychiatric care models from the perspective of users. This paper demonstrates that it is possible to use a participatory-collaborative approach within the methodologically rigorous confines of a prospective, controlled research design.
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.