Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38118426›Full record

ArticlePsychotherapy and psychosomatics2023

Screening Second Victims for Emotional Distress: Assessment of the Clinimetric Properties of the WITHSTAND-PSY Questionnaire.

Isolde Martina Busch, Maria Angela Mazzi, Loretta Berti, Albert W Wu, Fiammetta Cosci, Veronica Marinelli, Francesca Moretti, Michela Rimondini

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 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

8 authors.

Isolde Martina BuschDepartment of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Clinical Psychology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Maria Angela MazziDepartment of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Clinical Psychology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Loretta BertiDepartment of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Clinical Psychology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Albert W WuDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Fiammetta CosciDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Veronica MarinelliDepartment of Surgery, Dentistry, Paediatrics and Gynaecology, Section of General and Pancreatic Surgery, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Francesca MorettiDepartment of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Michela RimondiniDepartment of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, Section of Clinical Psychology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAdverse events (AEs) are a leading cause of patient morbidity and mortality, greatly impacting healthcare providers' well-being (second victim (SV) phenomenon). Since it is not accurately captured by existing psychometric instruments, we developed a clinimetric instrument for assessing SVs' emotional distress before and after an AE.

methodsContent validity and clinical utility of the WITHSTAND-PSY Questionnaire (WS-PSY-Q) were examined using cognitive interviews. Rasch analysis (n = 284) was applied for clinimetric assessment (i.e., construct, concurrent, and clinical validity, internal consistency), considering two crucial psychological facets of the SV phenomenon (1st: emotional impact of the AE, 2nd: current emotional state).

resultsThe Rasch partial credit model was used. The 1st facet demonstrated overall acceptable clinimetric properties with the subscale anxiety meeting clinimetric threshold values (e.g., all items with ordered thresholds, Loevinger's coefficient h ≥ 0.40; Person Separation Reliability Index (PSI) = 0.7). The 2nd facet showed overall better clinimetric properties for both subscales (e.g., h ≥ 0.40, PSI = 0.82 and 0.79, respectively; receiver operating characteristic area of 0.80 and 0.86, respectively). For both datasets, item fit statistics, except those for item 19, were within the critical range (z-score < ±2.5), and meaningful differential functioning analysis was observed for only 4 (out of 24) items. Local dependency was not observed, except for two item couples in the depression subscales.

conclusionsThe WS-PSY-Q is the first clinimetric tool assessing SVs' emotional distress. It should be regarded as part of the armamentarium used by clinicians to assess in-depth healthcare providers' psychological reactions in the aftermath of an AE to mitigate burnout and allostatic overload.

Indexed as

AnxietyPsychological DistressHealth PersonnelHumansPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesAdverse eventClinimetric patient-reported outcome measuresPsychological assessmentPsychological stressSecond victim

Identifiers

PMID38118426
PMCPMC10794969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.