Trial reportThe British journal of clinical psychology2025
Ensuring that psychological interventions are delivered as intended on mental health inpatient wards.
Trial report in The British journal of clinical psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ensuring that psychological interventions are delivered as intended on mental health inpatient wards.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2025Trial
- Assessing mentalization in practice: Reliability of the mentalization-based treatment research adherence and competence scale.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026Article
- Umbrella review of psychosocial and ward-based interventions to reduce self-harm and suicide risks in in-patient mental health settings.BJPsych open · 2025Review
- Barriers to the implementation of psychosocial interventions on acute mental health wards: an ethnographic observational study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTalk, Understand and Listen for InPatient Settings (TULIPS) was a multi-centred randomized control trial of an intervention that aimed to increase patient access to psychological therapies on acute mental health wards. This paper aims to: (i) describe a strategy for designing a psychological intervention that is implementable in inpatient mental health settings; (ii) describe methods for assessing the fidelity of interventions within these settings; (iii) report on the extent to which fidelity was achieved in the TULIPS trial.
methodsThe TULIPS intervention was designed using information from a systematic review, stakeholder interviews, pilot work and a consensus workshop. We assessed fidelity to the model in terms of the delivery and dose of essential elements of the intervention, quality of intervention delivery, engagement of participants with the intervention and differentiation between the intervention and usual care.
resultsAlthough the TULIPS intervention targeted known barriers to the delivery of psychological interventions on mental health wards, we found issues in implementing aspects of the intervention that were dependent upon the participation of members of the multidisciplinary team. Psychologists were able to overcome barriers to delivering individual therapy to patients as this provision was not reliant on the availability of other staff.
conclusionsThe intervention period in the study was 6 months. A greater period of time with a critical mass of psychological practitioners is needed to embed psychological interventions on inpatient wards. Our fidelity framework and assessment methods can be used by other researchers implementing and testing psychological therapies within inpatient environments.
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.