Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38502175›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2024

Implementing and Evaluating a National Integrated Digital Registry and Clinical Decision Support System in Early Intervention in Psychosis Services (Early Psychosis Informatics Into Care): Co-Designed Protocol.

Siân Lowri Griffiths, Graham K Murray, Yanakan Logeswaran, John Ainsworth, Sophie M Allan, Niyah Campbell, Richard J Drake, Mohammad Zia Ul Haq Katshu, Matthew Machin, Megan A Pope and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

18 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Siân Lowri GriffithsInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0031-7174
Graham K MurrayDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8296-1742
Yanakan LogeswaranDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8310-8767
John AinsworthThe University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2187-9195
Sophie M AllanDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapies, Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3601-0580
Niyah CampbellInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4859-025X
Richard J DrakeThe University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0220-4835
Mohammad Zia Ul Haq KatshuInstitute of Mental Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1301-3359
Matthew MachinThe University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6600-9508
Megan A PopeInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5162-0937
Sarah A SullivanCentre for Academic Mental Health, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1446-8478
Justin WaringSchool of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1459-5896
Tumelo BogatsuInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Julie KaneBirmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9079-7644
Tyler WeetmanBirmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0843-0542
Sonia JohnsonDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2219-1384
James B KirkbrideDivision of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3401-0824
Rachel UpthegroveInstitute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8204-5103
University of Birmingham · GBBirmingham Women’s and Children’s NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity College London · GBCentre for Mental Health · GBGreater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GBUniversity of Manchester · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly intervention in psychosis (EIP) services are nationally mandated in England to provide multidisciplinary care to people experiencing first-episode psychosis, which disproportionately affects deprived and ethnic minority youth. Quality of service provision varies by region, and people from historically underserved populations have unequal access. In other disease areas, including stroke and dementia, national digital registries coupled with clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) have revolutionized the delivery of equitable, evidence-based interventions to transform patient outcomes and reduce population-level disparities in care. Given psychosis is ranked the third most burdensome mental health condition by the World Health Organization, it is essential that we achieve the same parity of health improvements.

objectiveThis paper reports the protocol for the program development phase of this study, in which we aimed to co-design and produce an evidence-based, stakeholder-informed framework for the building, implementation, piloting, and evaluation of a national integrated digital registry and CDSS for psychosis, known as EPICare (Early Psychosis Informatics into Care).

methodsWe conducted 3 concurrent work packages, with reciprocal knowledge exchange between each. In work package 1, using a participatory co-design framework, key stakeholders (clinicians, academics, policy makers, and patient and public contributors) engaged in 4 workshops to review, refine, and identify a core set of essential and desirable measures and features of the EPICare registry and CDSS. Using a modified Delphi approach, we then developed a consensus of data priorities. In work package 2, we collaborated with National Health Service (NHS) informatics teams to identify relevant data currently captured in electronic health records, understand data retrieval methods, and design the software architecture and data model to inform future implementation. In work package 3, observations of stakeholder workshops and individual interviews with representative stakeholders (n=10) were subject to interpretative qualitative analysis, guided by normalization process theory, to identify factors likely to influence the adoption and implementation of EPICare into routine practice.

resultsStage 1 of the EPICare study took place between December 2021 and September 2022. The next steps include stage 2 building, piloting, implementation, and evaluation of EPICare in 5 demonstrator NHS Trusts serving underserved and diverse populations with substantial need for EIP care in England. If successful, this will be followed by stage 3, in which we will seek NHS adoption of EPICare for rollout to all EIP services in England.

conclusionsBy establishing a multistakeholder network and engaging them in an iterative co-design process, we have identified essential and desirable elements of the EPICare registry and CDSS; proactively identified and minimized potential challenges and barriers to uptake and implementation; and addressed key questions related to informatics architecture, infrastructure, governance, and integration in diverse NHS Trusts, enabling us to proceed with the building, piloting, implementation, and evaluation of EPICare. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/50177.

Indexed as

clinical decision support systemco-designdecision supportdigital registryEarly Intervention in Psychosismental healthparticipatoryparticipatory co-designpsychiatrypsychosisregistrystudy protocol

Identifiers

PMID38502175
PMCPMC10988369
OpenAlexW4392090797

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.