Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38589737›Full record

ArticleAdministration and policy in mental health2025

Motives of Therapists for Using Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) and How it is Used by Them in Clinical Practice: Two Qualitative Studies.

Shaghayegh Azizian Kia, Lisette Wittkampf, Jacobine van Lankeren, Pauline Janse

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Administration and policy in mental health, 2025. 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 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Shaghayegh Azizian Kia *Pro Persona Research, Wolfheze, The Netherlands.
Lisette Wittkampf *Pro Persona Research, Wolfheze, The Netherlands.
Jacobine van LankerenPro Persona Research, Wolfheze, The Netherlands.
Pauline JansePro Persona Research, Wolfheze, The Netherlands. p.janse@propersona.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-9756-5862

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite its demonstrated value, many mental health institutions struggle to implement progress feedback effectively. There is also insufficient information about how therapists utilize progress feedback. To gain more insight, two qualitative studies were conducted. The first study compared the attitudes and motives of therapists who used and those who did not use progress feedback. The second study examined how psychologists incorporated progress feedback into their practice. In total, 23 therapists were interviewed, and the data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The first study found that almost all the therapists had a positive attitude about progress feedback. Those who did not use it indicated reasons such as a heavy workload and patient-related factors, and they also lacked sufficient information about the potential benefits of progress feedback. The second study revealed four major ways in which the therapists utilized feedback, namely: supporting actions to discuss progress feedback, discussing progress feedback with patients, modifications in the ongoing treatment, and peer consultation. However, discussions during peer consultations about using progress feedback for patients who were not benefitting from treatment and how the treatment might be adjusted accordingly were often lacking. In conclusion, it is crucial that training and education be provided to therapists on how to use progress feedback effectively. Having regular discussions about progress feedback during peer consultations could also facilitate its integration into clinical practice.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelMotivationQualitative ResearchAdultFeedbackFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePsychotherapyImplementationMeasurement Based CareProgress FeedbackQualitative AnalysisRoutine Outcome Monitoring

Identifiers

PMID38589737
PMCPMC11703879

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.