ArticleBJPsych bulletin2025
Gaps between paediatric and psychiatric surveillance systems: rates of reporting in joint studies.
Article in BJPsych bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
AIMS AND
methodThe British Paediatric Surveillance Unit of the UK Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health contacts participating consultant paediatricians each month to survey whether particular rare conditions or events have been seen in their services. This national surveillance of rare paediatric events has allowed a large amount of research into multiple paediatric conditions. In 2009, the Royal College of Psychiatrists established a similar system - the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Surveillance System (CAPSS) - to survey consultant psychiatrists in UK and Ireland. Since many conditions involve mental and physical health features, seven studies have been run using reporting to both systems, with simultaneous surveillance across both paediatricians and psychiatrists. Given the desire by policymakers, commissioners and clinicians for well-integrated physical and mental healthcare ('joined-up working'), and if the surveillance systems were functioning well, the CAPSS Executive expected high rates of parallel reporting of individual patients to the two systems. The current study synthesises the rates of parallel reporting of cases to those two systems. We assimilate rates of parallel reporting across the seven studies using figures that have already been published, and by contacting contributing research groups directly where the relevant figures are not currently published. No new primary data were collected.
resultsOf the 1211 confirmed cases, 47 (3.9%) were reported by both psychiatrists and paediatricians. No parallel reporting occurred in four of the seven studies. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our findings raise questions about whether joined-up working in mental and physical healthcare is happening in practice. Research into challenges to obtaining comprehensive surveillance will help epidemiologists improve their use of surveillance and control for biases.
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.