ArticleBMJ open quality2023
Development and testing of the QDis-MH checklist for discharge letters from specialised mental healthcare: a stakeholder-centred study.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality of discharge letters concerning readmissions to mental healthcare: case-control study.BJPsych open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 'discharge letter' is the mandatory written report sent from specialists in the specialist services to general practitioners (GPs) on patient discharge. Clear recommendations from relevant stakeholders for contents of discharge letters and instruments to measure the quality of discharge letters in mental healthcare are needed. The objectives were to (1) detect which information relevant stakeholders defined as important to include in discharge letters from mental health specialist services, (2) develop a checklist to measure the quality of discharge letters and (3) test the psychometric properties of the checklist.
methodsWe used a stepwise multimethod stakeholder-centred approach. Group interviews with GPs, mental health specialists and patient representatives defined 68 information items with 10 consensus-based thematic headings relevant to include in high-quality discharge letters. Information items rated as highly important by GPs (n=50) were included in the Quality of Discharge information-Mental Health (QDis-MH) checklist. The 26-item checklist was tested by GPs (n=18) and experts in healthcare improvement or health services research (n=15). Psychometric properties were assessed using estimates of intrascale consistency and linear mixed effects models. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability were assessed using Gwet's agreement coefficient (Gwet's AC1) and intraclass correlation coefficients.
resultsThe QDis-MH checklist had satisfactory intrascale consistency. Inter-rater reliability was poor to moderate, and test-retest reliability was moderate. In descriptive analyses, mean checklist scores were higher in the category of discharge letters defined as 'good' than in 'medium' or 'poor' letters, but differences did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionsGPs, mental health specialists and patient representatives defined 26 information items relevant to include in discharge letters in mental healthcare. The QDis-MH checklist is valid and feasible. However, when using the checklist, raters should be trained and the number of raters kept to a minimum due to questionable inter-rater reliability.
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.