Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36338245›Full record

ArticleSchizophrenia research. Cognition2023

Development and validation of a fidelity instrument for Cognitive Adaptation Training.

Michelle van Dam, Jaap van Weeghel, Stynke Castelein, Annemarie Stiekema, Piotr Quee, Sean Kidd, Kelly Allott, Natalie Maples, Dawn Velligan, Marieke Pijnenborg and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Schizophrenia research. Cognition, 2023. 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

11 authors.

Michelle van DamLentis Psychiatric Institute, Department of Rehabilitation, Zuidlaren, the Netherlands.
Jaap van WeeghelPhrenos center of expertise on severe mental illness, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Stynke CasteleinLentis Psychiatric Institute, Research Department, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Annemarie StiekemaSchool for Mental Health and Neuroscience, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Piotr QueeGGZ Breburg, Centre for Anxiety and Mood Disorders, Breda, the Netherlands.
Sean KiddDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Kelly AllottOrygen Youth Health Research Centre, Parkville, Australia.
Natalie MaplesDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Dawn VelliganDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Marieke PijnenborgGGZ Drenthe, Department of Psychotic Disorders, Assen, the Netherlands.
Lisette van der MeerLentis Psychiatric Institute, Department of Rehabilitation, Zuidlaren, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Cognitive Adaptation Training (CAT) is a psychosocial intervention with demonstrated effectiveness. However, no validated fidelity instrument is available. In this study, a CAT Fidelity Scale was developed and its psychometric properties, including interrater reliability and internal consistency, were evaluated. Methods: The fidelity scale was developed in a multidisciplinary collaboration between international research groups using the Delphi method. Four Delphi rounds were organized to reach consensus for the items included in the scale. To examine the psychometric properties of the scale, data from a large cluster randomized controlled trial evaluating the implementation of CAT in clinical practice was used. Fidelity assessors conducted 73 fidelity reviews at four mental health institutions in the Netherlands. Results: After three Delphi rounds, consensus was reached on a 44-item CAT Fidelity Scale. After administration of the scale, 24 items were removed in round four resulting in a 20-item fidelity scale. Psychometric properties of the 20-item CAT Fidelity Scale shows a fair interrater reliability and an excellent internal consistency. Conclusions: The CAT fidelity scale in its current form is useful for both research purposes as well as for individual health professionals to monitor their own adherence to the protocol. Future research needs to focus on improvement of items and formulating qualitative anchor point to the items to increase generalizability and psychometric properties of the scale. The described suggestions for improvement provide a good starting point for further development.

Indexed as

Evidence-based practiceFidelityImplementationSevere mental illnesses

Identifiers

PMID36338245
PMCPMC9634354

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.