Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40874259›Full record

ArticlePsychological medicine2025

Adapting evidence-based psychological treatments for inpatient care: Commentary on Rudd (2025).

Mariah T Hawes, Stephanie Marcello, Evan M Kleiman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mariah T Haweshttps://ror.org/029z02k15Rutgers University Behavioral Health Care, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6048-1227
Stephanie Marcellohttps://ror.org/029z02k15Rutgers University Behavioral Health Care, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.
Evan M Kleimanhttps://ror.org/029z02k15Rutgers University Behavioral Health Care, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rudd (2025) submitted a comment on our recent editorial, which highlights the widespread lack of access to evidence-based psychological treatment (EBT) in psychiatric inpatient care and encourages increased efforts to study adaptations of existing EBTs for this setting (Hawes, Marcello, & Kleiman, 2025). In our editorial, we specifically call for investment in inpatient group therapy, as this is the dominant mode of psychological treatment in psychiatric hospitals due to limited staff availability coupled with a lack of reimbursement incentives for individual therapy. Rudd offers a compelling case for the consideration of problem-specific and strategic treatment add-ons adapted from existing EBTs for inpatient care, such as his adaptation of brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for suicide prevention for inpatient care (BCBT-I). BCBT-I is an abbreviated version of a one-on-one outpatient EBT that produced comparable reductions in posttreatment suicide risk to the full protocol (Diefenbach et al., 2024). We agree that existing EBTs that can serve as efficient add-ons to traditional care, such as BCBT-I, can offer a compelling avenue for improving inpatient care. We view adaptations of EBTs for group therapy and strategic add-on formats as complementary and overlapping strategies that together address the ongoing crisis in inpatient care. In this article, we elaborate on the challenges in adapting EBTs for acute settings and how nontraditional treatment models, like strategic treatment add-ons and open, stand-alone single-session groups, can address these challenges.

Indexed as

Cognitive Behavioral TherapyEvidence-Based PracticeInpatientsMental DisordersSuicide PreventionHospitals, PsychiatricHumans

Identifiers

PMID40874259
PMCPMC13040583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.