SynthesisEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2025
Identifying studies examining the validity of instruments for use as outcome measures in child and adolescent forensic mental health services: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOutcome measurement in child and adolescent forensic mental health services can support service improvement, research, and patient progress evaluation. This systematic review aimed to identify studies which validate structured instruments available for use as outcome measures in the child and adolescent forensic mental health service cohort and assess the quality of these studies.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were identified by searching six online databases in November 2023. The quality and risk of bias of each study meeting inclusion criteria was independently assessed by two authors using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool. Results were synthesised narratively.
resultsA total of eight studies were identified which met inclusion criteria. These looked at six instruments which primarily focused on outcome measures in the areas of treatment motivation, level of functioning, psychiatric symptoms, care needs and response to social situations. Papers scored between 17/40 and 30/40 on the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool. Studies were rated as low (n = 1), moderate (n = 6), high (n = 1) or very high quality (n = 0).
conclusionsDespite the large number of structured instruments potentially available, evidence for their use as outcome measures in child and adolescent forensic mental health services is limited. Future research should aim to validate current structured instruments for use in the forensic child and adolescent setting, with consideration of whether new instruments should be developed specifically for this group. Such instruments should be developed with both young people as service users and professionals who will be utilising the instrument in mind.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.