scholarly journals There is no place for the psychoanalytic case report in the British Journal of Psychiatry

2009 ◽  
Vol 195 (6) ◽  
pp. 483-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lewis Wolpert ◽  
Peter Fonagy
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
British Journal ◽  
Clinical Utility ◽  
Single Case ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
The Status ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Scientific Testing

SummaryAs evidence-based mental health and the randomised controlled trial come to dominate the content of major psychiatric journals, the status and clinical utility of single case reports have been increasingly questioned. Arguably, owing to their subjective, anecdotal nature and unsuitability for rigorous scientific testing, this is particularly true of psychoanalytic case studies. Professor Peter Fonagy and Professor Lewis Wolpert debate here whether or not there is a place for such case reports in the British Journal of Psychiatry.

scholarly journals Pengantar Evidence-Based Case Reports

Sari Pediatri ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 385
Author(s):  
Partini Pudjiastuti
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Medical Journal ◽  
British Journal ◽  
Case Report ◽  
British Medical Journal ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Based Medicine

Evidence-based case report (EBCR) merupakan suatu metode penulisan atau pelaporan sebuah kasus atau masalah klinis dengan pendekatan berbasis bukti. Metode atau desain pelaporan kasus EBCR merupakan bentuk aplikasi evidence-based medicine (EBM) yang telah banyak dipublikasikan di jurnal internasional, seperti Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, Evidence-Based Mental Health, British Medical Journal and British Journal of Psychiatry. Naskah EBCR umumnya ditulis secara ringkas dengan jumlah kata maksimum 2500, mengandung 4 ilustrasi (grafik, tabel, foto pasien) dan 24 rujukan atau referens. Sebagai layaknya sebuah laporan kasus, maka EBCR terdiri atas beberapa bagian.a. Pendahuluanb. Kasus atau skenario klinisc. Rumusan masalahd. Metode /strategi penelusuran buktie. Hasil penelusuran buktif. Diskusig. Kesimpulanh. Daftar pustaka

scholarly journals Non-strategic ignorance: Considering the potential for a paradigm shift in evidence-based mental health

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan McPherson ◽  
Felicitas Rost ◽  
Sukhjit Sidhu ◽  
Maxine Dennis
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Strategic Ignorance

Randomised controlled trials form a central building block within the prevailing evidence-based mental health paradigm. Both methodology and paradigm have been widely problematised since their emergence in the mid-late twentieth century. We draw on the concept of ‘strategic ignorance’ to understand why the paradigm still prevails. We present focus group data gathered from 37 participants (service users, public, carers, general practitioners, commissioners) concerning the way they made sense of a randomised controlled trial of psychotherapy for treatment-resistant depression. Thematic analysis of the findings revealed an overall critique of randomised controlled trial methods which we refer to as ‘non-strategic ignorance’. Specifically, participants problematised the construct of depression, unseating the premise of the randomised controlled trial; they were sceptical about the purpose and highlighted its failure to show how therapy works or who might benefit; the randomised controlled trial was seen as inadequate for informing decisions about how to select a therapy. Participants assumed the treatment would be cost-effective given the client group and nature of the therapy, irrespective of any randomised controlled trial findings. Each area of lay (‘non-strategic’) critique has an analogous form within the methodological expert domain. We argue that ‘expert’ critiques have generally failed to have paradigmatic impact because they represent strategic ignorance. Yet parallel non-strategic critiques have common sense appeal, highlighting the potential power of lay voices. The discussion considers whether the evidence-based mental health paradigm is faced with epistemological problems of such complexity that the conditions exist for a new paradigm in which service user views are central and randomised controlled trials peripheral.

scholarly journals Supported online cognitive behavioural therapy for bulimia nervosa: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Barakat ◽  
Stephen Touyz ◽  
Danielle Maloney ◽  
Janice Russell ◽  
Phillipa Hay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Bulimia Nervosa ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Self Help ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Clinician Support

Abstract Background Despite the availability of effective treatments for bulimia nervosa (BN), a number of barriers to accessibility exist. Examples include access to trained clinicians, the expense of treatment, geographical limitations, and personal limitations such as stigma regarding help seeking. Self-help interventions, delivered via a digital platform, have the potential to overcome treatment gaps by providing patients with standardised, evidence-based treatments that are easily accessible, cost-effective, and require minimal clinician support. Equally, it is important to examine the shortcomings of digital interventions when compared to traditional to face-to-face delivery (e.g., high dropout rates) in order to maximise the therapeutic effectiveness of online, self-help interventions. Methods A three-arm, multisite randomised controlled trial will be conducted in Australia examining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a newly developed online self-help intervention, Binge Eating eTherapy (BEeT), in a sample of patients with full or sub-threshold BN. The BEeT program consists of 10, multimedia sessions delivering the core components of cognitive behaviour therapy. Eligible participants will be randomised to one of three groups: independent completion of BEeT as a purely self-help program, completion of BEeT alongside clinician support (in the form of weekly telemedicine sessions), or waitlist control. Assessments will take place at baseline, weekly, post-intervention, and three-month follow up. The primary outcome is frequency of objective binge episodes. Secondary outcomes include frequency of other core eating disorder behavioural symptoms and beliefs, psychological distress, and quality of life. Statistical analyses will examine treatment effectiveness, feasibility, acceptability and cost effectiveness. Discussion There is limited capacity within the mental health workforce in Australia to meet the demand of people seeking treatment for eating disorders. This imbalance has only worsened following outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further research is required into innovative digital modes of treatment delivery with the capacity to service mental health needs in an accessible and affordable manner. Self-help programs may also appeal to individuals who are more reluctant to engage in traditional face-to-face treatment formats. This study will provide rigorous evidence on how to diversify treatment options for individuals with BN, ensuring more people with the illness can access evidence-based treatment. The study has been registered with the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR Registration Number: ACTRN12619000123145p). Registered 22 January 2019, https://www.australianclinicaltrials.gov.au/anzctr/trial/ACTRN12619000123145.

scholarly journals Increasing demand for school counselling through a lay counsellor-delivered classroom sensitisation intervention: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial in New Delhi, India

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. e003902
Author(s):  
Rachana Parikh ◽  
Adriaan Hoogendoorn ◽  
Daniel Michelson ◽  
Jeroen Ruwaard ◽  
Rhea Sharma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
New Delhi ◽  
Stepped Wedge ◽  
Whole School ◽  
Cluster Randomised ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionWe evaluated a classroom-based sensitisation intervention that was designed to reduce demand-side barriers affecting referrals to a school counselling programme. The sensitisation intervention was offered in the context of a host trial evaluating a low-intensity problem-solving treatment for common adolescent mental health problems.MethodsWe conducted a stepped-wedge, cluster randomised controlled trial with 70 classes in 6 secondary schools serving low-income communities in New Delhi, India.The classes were randomised to receive a classroom sensitisation session involving a brief video presentation and moderated group discussion, delivered by a lay counsellor over one class period (intervention condition, IC), in two steps of 4 weeks each. The control condition (CC) was whole-school sensitisation (teacher-meetings and whole-school activities such as poster displays). The primary outcome was the proportion of students referred into the host trial. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of students who met mental health caseness criteria and the proportion of self-referred adolescents.ResultsBetween 20 August 2018 and 9 December 2018, 835 students (23.3% of all students) were referred into the host trial. The referred sample included 591 boys (70.8%), and had a mean age of 15.8 years, SD=0.06; 194 students (31.8% of 610 with complete data) met mental health caseness criteria. The proportion of students referred in each trial conditionwas significantly higher in the IC (IC=21.7%, CC=1.5%, OR=111.36, 95% CI 35.56 to 348.77, p<0.001). The proportion of self-referred participants was also higher in the IC (IC=98.1%, CC=89.1%, Pearson χ2 (1)=16.92, p<0.001). Although the proportion of referred students meeting caseness criteria was similar in both conditions (IC=32.0% vs CC=28.1%), the proportion weighted for the total student population was substantially higher in the IC (IC=5.2%, CC=0.3%, OR=52.39, 95% CI 12.49 to 219.66,p<0.001).ConclusionA single, lay counsellor-delivered, classroom sensitisation session increased psychological help-seeking for common mental health problems among secondary school pupils from urban, low-income communities in India.Trial registration numberNCT03633916.

scholarly journals Digital cognitive–behavioural therapy for insomnia compared with digital patient education about insomnia in individuals referred to secondary mental health services in Norway: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e050661
Author(s):  
Håvard Kallestad ◽  
Simen Saksvik ◽  
Øystein Vedaa ◽  
Knut Langsrud ◽  
Gunnar Morken ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Education ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Cognitive Behavioural ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionInsomnia is highly prevalent in outpatients receiving treatment for mental disorders. Cognitive–behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is a recommended first-line intervention. However, access is limited and most patients with insomnia who are receiving mental healthcare services are treated using medication. This multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) examines additional benefits of a digital adaptation of CBT-I (dCBT-I), compared with an online control intervention of patient education about insomnia (PE), in individuals referred to secondary mental health clinics.Methods and analysisA parallel group, superiority RCT with a target sample of 800 participants recruited from treatment waiting lists at Norwegian psychiatric services. Individuals awaiting treatment will receive an invitation to the RCT, with potential participants undertaking online screening and consent procedures. Eligible outpatients will be randomised to dCBT-I or PE in a 1:1 ratio. Assessments will be performed at baseline, 9 weeks after completion of baseline assessments (post-intervention assessment), 33 weeks after baseline (6 months after the post-intervention assessment) and 61 weeks after baseline (12 months after the post-intervention assessment). The primary outcome is between-group difference in insomnia severity 9 weeks after baseline. Secondary outcomes include between-group differences in levels of psychopathology, and measures of health and functioning 9 weeks after baseline. Additionally, we will test between-group differences at 6-month and 12-month follow-up, and examine any negative effects of the intervention, any changes in mental health resource use, and/or in functioning and prescription of medications across the duration of the study. Other exploratory analyses are planned.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics in Norway (Ref: 125068). Findings from the RCT will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and advocacy and stakeholder groups. Exploratory analyses, including potential mediators and moderators, will be reported separately from main outcomes.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04621643); Pre-results.

scholarly journals Consumer Feedback following Participation in a Family-Based Intervention for Youth Mental Health

2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Lewis ◽  
Melanie D. Bertino ◽  
Narelle Robertson ◽  
Tess Knight ◽  
John W. Toumbourou
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Treatment Implementation ◽  
Consumer Feedback ◽  
Family Based ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Further Development

Background. This paper presents findings derived from consumer feedback, following a multicentre randomised controlled trial for adolescent mental health problems and substance misuse. The paper focuses on the implementation of a family-based intervention, including fidelity of delivery, family members’ experiences, and their suggestions for program improvements.Methods. Qualitative and quantitative data (n=21) were drawn from the Deakin Family Options trial consumer focus groups, which occurred six months after the completion of the trial. Consumer focus groups were held in both metropolitan and regional locations in Victoria, Australia.Findings. Overall reductions in parental isolation, increases in parental self-care, and increased separation/individuation were the key therapeutic features of the intervention. Sharing family experiences with other parents was a key supportive factor, which improved parenting confidence and efficacy and potentially reduced family conflict. Consumer feedback also led to further development of the intervention, with a greater focus on aiding parents to engage adolescents in services and addressing family factors related to adolescent’s mood and anxiety symptoms.Conclusions. Participant feedback provides valuable qualitative data, to monitor the fidelity of treatment implementation within a trial, to confirm predictions about the effective mechanisms of an intervention, and to inform the development of new interventions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document