Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38845137›Full record

ReviewThe Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry2024

Development of a harmonized sociodemographic and clinical questionnaire for mental health research: A Delphi-method-based consensus recommendation.

Mojtaba Lotfaliany, Bruno Agustini, Adam J Walker, Alyna Turner, Anna L Wrobel, Lana J Williams, Olivia M Dean, Stephanie Miles, Susan L Rossell, Michael Berk and 2 more

Abstract readReviewConsensus Statement
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry, 2024. 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

12 authors.

Mojtaba LotfalianyDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.
Bruno AgustiniDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8735-2401
Adam J WalkerDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.
Alyna TurnerDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.
Anna L WrobelDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1864-0394
Lana J WilliamsDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.
Olivia M DeanDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.
Stephanie MilesOrygen, Parkville, VIC, Australia.
Susan L RossellCentre for Mental Health, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Michael BerkDeakin University, School of Medicine, IMPACT, The Institute for Mental and Physical Health and Clinical Translation, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5554-6946
Mohammadreza MohebbiBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9713-7211
HDQ Investigator Group

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveHarmonized tools are essential for reliable data sharing and accurate identification of relevant factors in mental health research. The primary objective of this study was to create a harmonized questionnaire to collect demographic, clinical and behavioral data in diverse clinical trials in adult psychiatry.

methodsWe conducted a literature review and examined 24 questionnaires used in previously published randomized controlled trials in psychiatry, identifying a total of 27 domains previously explored. Using a Delphi-method process, a task force team comprising experts in psychiatry, epidemiology and statistics selected 15 essential domains for inclusion in the final questionnaire.

resultsThe final selection resulted in a concise set of 22 questions. These questions cover factors such as age, sex, gender, ancestry, education, living arrangement, employment status, home location, relationship status, and history of medical and mental illness. Behavioral factors like physical activity, diet, smoking, alcohol and illicit drug use were also included, along with one question addressing family history of mental illness. Income was excluded due to high confounding and redundancy, while language was included as a measure of migration status.

conclusionThe recommendation and adoption of this harmonized tool for the assessment of demographic, clinical and behavioral data in mental health research can enhance data consistency and enable comparability across clinical trials.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueAdultBiomedical ResearchHumansMental DisordersMental HealthPsychiatrySurveys and Questionnairesbehavioralclinical trialDelphi studydemographicmental healthpsychiatrypsychometricsQuestionnairesociodemographic

Identifiers

PMID38845137
PMCPMC11308274

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.