SynthesisActa neuropsychiatrica2025
Competence and confidence of health care professionals in using clozapine: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.
Synthesis in Acta neuropsychiatrica, 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.
- Adult psychiatrists' views on clozapine prescribing for schizophrenia in Germany-an online survey.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClozapine is the only licensed medication for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, although it is underused. Healthcare professionals (medical and non-medical professionals) play a crucial role in the management of clozapine. Consultant psychiatrists are accountable for the initiation of clozapine, whereas non-medical professionals are often responsible for the monitoring, the management of side effects and patient education. It appears that healthcare professionals‘ (HCPs) competence and confidence may have an effect on clozapine underutilisation.
aimTo synthesise the most pertinent literature examining the factors influencing HCPs competence and confidence in the management of clozapine and how these factors influence variation in prescribing practice.
methodsA review of the literature focusing on these elements was conducted. The Population, Context, Outcome (PCO) framework was adopted to support the literature search. The databases Medline, Psychinfo, Scopus, Cinahl, Pubmed, Embase, British Library, Ethos e-thesis, Google Scholar, Dart Europe e-thesis were consulted; the search was completed in January 2025. Screening, selection, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by two researchers. Thematic analysis was used to investigate and compare the data emerging from the studies.
resultsThirty-four articles were included in the review. Six themes were identified: attitude toward and knowledge about clozapine, misconceptions (regarding side effects, monitoring and co-morbidities), guidelines, education, training and experience. HCPs self-reported as competent with guidelines (local and national), yet they expressed less confidence in their ability to adhere to them and were uncertain about managing side effects. Lack of education, training and insufficient exposure to clozapine management were significant factors impacting competence and confidence, resulting in clozapine underuse and variance in prescribing practice. The review highlighted a gap in the literature, as only a few studies involving non-medical professionals were found.
conclusionsA general lack of education and training related to clozapine use was identified amongst all professionals.The impact of educational programmes on improving competence and enhancing confidence was considered positive, however when integrated with clinical practice.The studies identified in this review were lacking in the involvement of non-medical professionals. Given their crucial role in managing side effects and educating patients and carers, it is evident that their inclusion in future research is imperative.
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.