ArticleCureus2026
Improving Psychiatric History-Taking Documentation: A Quality Improvement Audit and Re-Audit.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAccurate psychiatric history taking is fundamental to diagnosis, formulation, treatment planning, and patient safety. This comparative audit evaluated the impact of training interventions on the completeness of psychiatric history documentation, compared outcomes across two audit cycles, and identified ongoing documentation deficits. PATIENTS AND
methodsA clinical audit and re-audit were carried out in a community mental health service. The first audit cycle took place in July 2025 and the second in December 2025. In each cycle, 10 first-assessment psychiatric records of newly referred patients were reviewed. Each record was assessed according to the psychiatric history-taking domains described in Kaplan and Sadock's
conclusionTraining helped improve the documentation of psychiatric history, but some areas remained incomplete. Ongoing supervision, experiential learning, and the use of structured templates are essential to sustaining improvements and ensuring that documentation remains comprehensive and accurate.
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.