ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Better safe than sorry - a qualitative study of multidisciplinary use of the V-RISK-10 in assessing patients with psychosis.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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.
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
Background: Violence in mental health inpatient settings is a recognized challenge and structured professional judgement (SPJ) tools might aid clinicians in assessing risk and tailoring preventive interventions. Multidisciplinary collaboration when completing SPJ tools have been considered a feasible approach to reducing bias, increasing transparency and linking risk assessment with risk management. This study aims to explore experiences among health care professionals on multidisciplinary use of the SPJ tool violence risk screen V-RISK-10 in a closed psychosis ward. Methods: Data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews with a heterogeneous sample of health care professionals (n=8) recruited from a psychosis ward at a psychiatric hospital in Norway. Snowball sampling was utilized to recruit participants who had experiences relevant for the study's aim. Transcribed interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Three overarching themes were identified: 1) attitudes toward screening for possible violence, 2) attitudes towards using the V-RISK-10 and 3) attitudes toward multidisciplinary use of the V-RISK-10. In summary, subthemes revealed that screening was perceived as important, and participants perceived the tool in question as quick and systematic yet noted that missing information on the day of admittance was problematic. Important discussions were sparked and targeted interventions initiated as a result of multidisciplinary collaboration. Discussion: Staff attitudes have been described as a potential barrier for the use of SPJ tools, yet little empirical knowledge exists on the beliefs behind staff attitudes. Our study sheds light on what staff found helpful and not helpful when using the V-RISK-10. These findings can aid implementation of SPJ tools, especially screening instruments, because they highlight possible pathways toward increased use for health care professionals.
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.