Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36687823›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Development and refinement of the open dialog adherence protocol in complex mental health care.

Melissa Lotmore, Douglas Ziedonis, Mauricio Alvarez Monjaras, Mark Hopfenbeck, Russell Razzaque, Emily Wilson, Stephen Pilling

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Melissa LotmoreDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Douglas ZiedonisDepartment of Health Sciences, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, United States.
Mauricio Alvarez MonjarasDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Mark HopfenbeckDepartment of Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Sør-Trøndelag, Norway.
Russell RazzaqueNorth East London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Emily WilsonDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen PillingDepartment of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
University College London · GBNorth East London NHS Foundation Trust · GBNorwegian University of Science and Technology · NOUniversity of New Mexico · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Open dialog (OD) is a both a therapeutic practice and a service delivery model that offers an integrated response to mental health care through mobilizing resources within the service user's family and community networks through joint network meetings. Therapist adherence is a crucial to the effective delivery of interventions. A key way to measure this is through structured observation tools. Aims: The aim of this research project is to develop and refine the Dialogic Practice Adherence Scale, for use in OD research trials in the United Kingdom. Methods: This study was a mixed methods approach to the development of an OD practitioner adherence measure. Initial steps involved meetings and discussions with experts and a review of the literature. Content validation studies were completed using a modified Delphi technique. To assess reliability of the measure, OD network meetings were audio-recorded, and tapes were rated by two independent researchers. Inter-rater reliability and internal consistency were assessed through quantitative approaches assessing variance. Results: Results provide a description of how the OD Adherence Manual was developed in collaboration. Validation surveys showed high levels on consensus among experts in the field on the key elements of OD network meetings. Inter-rater reliability for the total score was excellent and internal consistency analyses suggest the scale is highly reliable. Discussion: The scale presented here is an initial attempt at rating practitioner adherence in OD network meetings. It provides encouraging evidence that this can be done with strong validity and reliability and can be completed by a range of raters with varying levels of clinical experience.

Indexed as

adherencemeasuremental healthopen dialogueprotocolreliability

Identifiers

PMID36687823
PMCPMC9853976
OpenAlexW4313622335

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.