Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37284917›Full record

ArticleJournal of community health2024

Assessment of Critical Health and Safety Risks in Homes where Hoarding is Prevalent.

Persephone Larkin, Christiana Bratiotis, Sheila R Woody

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Persephone LarkinDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. plarkin@psych.ubc.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-3679-5434
Christiana BratiotisSchool of Social Work, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0374-2774
Sheila R WoodyDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5006-4828

Funding

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada 890-2019-0030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hoarding behaviour sometimes requires intervention from community agencies to reduce risks to residents and the nearby community. Human services professionals from a wide range of disciplines are called upon to address hoarding concerns, often in collaboration with each other. No guidelines currently exist to guide staff from those community agencies in a shared understanding of common health and safety risks that occur with severe hoarding behaviour. Using a modified Delphi method, we aimed to generate consensus among a panel of 34 service-provider experts from a range of disciplines on essential risks in the home that would require intervention for health or safety reasons. This process identified 31 environmental risk factors that experts agreed are critical to assess in cases of hoarding. Panelist comments outlined the debates that commonly occur in the field, the complexity of hoarding, and the difficulty with conceptualizing risks in the home. The multi-disciplinary consensus achieved on these risks will facilitate better collaboration between agencies by providing a minimum standard of what to evaluate in hoarded homes to ensure health and safety standards are being met. This can improve communication between agencies, specify the core hazards that should be incorporated into training for professionals who work with hoarding, and facilitate more standardized assessment of health and safety risks in hoarded homes.

Indexed as

HoardingCommunicationHumansCommunityDelphi methodEnvironmental risksHoardingMultidisciplinary

Identifiers

PMID37284917
PMCPMC10881672

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.