ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2024
Qualitative analysis of emotional distress in burns, plastic and reconstructive surgery patients from the perspectives of cognitive and metacognitive models.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Scoping Review of Mental Health Outcomes of Cosmetic Procedures Among the Saudi Population.Saudi medical journal · 2026Article
- Psycho-Socio-Cultural Determinants of Delayed Presentation for Specialized Burn Care and Their Clinical Consequences: A Mixed Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Burns and other injuries requiring plastic and/or reconstructive surgery (BPRS) are lifechanging, often unexpected, and increase the risk of psychiatric morbidity. There are no published studies we are aware of that explores the applicability of psychological models to BPRS patients. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the benchmark treatment in mental health but may be less effective in physical health settings. Metacognitive therapy (MCT)can be more effective than CBT in mental health settings and shows promise in reducing anxiety and depression symptoms in people with cancer and cardiac disease. The present study explored the psychological experiences (feelings, thoughts, and coping strategies) of BPRS patients, and whether the concepts underpinning cognitive and metacognitive models can be elicited from these accounts. Method: Semi structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients recruited from a BPRS psychology service. Data was analysed using Thematic Analysis. Patients described a range of emotions including low mood, anxiety, anger, guilt, loss, and negative thinking. Results: From the perspective of the cognitive model, there were examples of each of 10 pre-specified distorted thinking types (cognitive distortions), and patient talk seemed to fit problem-specific cognitive models. From the perspective of the metacognitive model, all patients described the "cognitive attentional syndrome," i.e., how they engaged in repetitive negative thinking (worry, rumination) and thought-focused regulation strategies. Patient talk also demonstrated both positive and negative metacognitive beliefs. Conclusion: The implications of applying the findings from each model to clinical practice are discussed. The metacognitive model may offer benefits in clinical practice that should be investigated further.
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.