Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35866532›Full record

SynthesisRevista de neurologia2022

[Ten years of the prefrontal symptoms inventory (PSI). A systematic review].

E J Pedrero-Pérez, J M Ruiz-Sánchez de León

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Revista de neurologia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

E J Pedrero-PérezUniversidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, España.
J M Ruiz-Sánchez de LeónUniversidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, España.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTen years ago, Revista de Neurologia published the validation of a new free tool: the Prefrontal Symptoms Inventory (PSI), from which an abbreviated version (PSI-20) was subsequently extracted. Over this decade, authors have demonstrated its excellent psychometric properties and clinical usefulness. This systematic review, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement, aims to analyse the body of research that has used the PSI or PSI-20 in order to assess its relevance in other research teams, other clinical populations and even other cultures. MATERIALS AND

methodsA search was conducted to find articles written in Spanish, English, French and Portuguese that have used the inventory to carry out empirical research. Finally, 56 articles were selected.

resultsThe results show that the PSI and the PSI-20 have been widely used in Spain as well as in other Spanish-speaking countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador or Venezuela) and employed to a moderate extent in non-Spanish-speaking countries (Belgium, Brazil, Sweden or Switzerland). The clinical populations in which they have been used range from acquired brain injury and degenerative dementias to chronic pain, fibromyalgia, addictive behaviours or personality disorders. Given their versatility, they have also been used with the general population, including prison inmates, women in rural areas, university students or to study cognitive reserve.

conclusionsThe PSI and PSI-20 are useful instruments for research and clinical use, and the next challenge is to validate an English version, which is currently being worked on.

Indexed as

Brain InjuriesArgentinaBrazilFemaleHumansPsychometricsWriting

Identifiers

PMID35866532
PMCPMC10280713

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.