ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Efficacy pilot study of the DSM-5 Cultural Formulation Interview in a specialized mental healthcare inpatient unit for adolescents in Norway.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The DSM-5 core Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) is designed with the agenda of letting the patient's perspective become as important for treatment and care as the clinician's assessments. This is in line with the person-centered turn in every part of the health care system in Norway. However, international CFI research on majority populations and on adolescents remains scarce. This study is the first to test the feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility of core CFI with adolescents in a specialized mental healthcare inpatient unit in Norway. Methods: The study used a mixed methods design with three stages, inspired by and expanding the CFI testing research in the United States: 1) Cultural analysis of the clinical context and CFI training, 2) Data gathering with CFI interviews, debriefing instruments, and semi-structured interviews with six consecutive adolescents (aged 14-17 years) with various severe mental health problems, and multi-method data gathering with three interdisciplinary CFI-trained clinicians, and 3) Efficacy evaluation of the CFI. Results: Adolescents and clinicians reported positive perceptions of the CFI's feasibility, acceptability, and clinical utility. The CFI supported service user involvement and treatment planning, consistent with international evidence. Both patients and clinicians described the CFI as a type of intervention that initiated a process of reflection and deeper understanding of challenges as well as resources, with patients expecting their narratives to be understood, shared, and integrated into treatment planning. Conclusion: This study contributes to person-centered care (PCC) research by underscoring the importance of actively involving adolescents in their treatment processes. Based on these findings, the clinic initiated a request to evaluate the integration of the CFI process (core interview and use of this information in treatment planning) into standard treatment protocols through an implementation study, which is currently underway.
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.