Using Needs Assessment to Understand Continuing Disability in Patients with Enduring Mental Illness. Implications for Considerations of Service Development

Particular strengths of the MRC Needs for Care Assessment Schedule have been used to investigate the treatment status of patients with persistent psychiatric disability in ways that other needs assessment tools are unable to. One hundred and seventy-nine such patients from three settings; a private sector psychiatric hospital, two public sector day hospitals situated in the same town, and a high security hospital, were found to have a high level of need. Although there were differences between settings, overall these needs were well met in all three. The high level of persistent disability found amongst these patients could not be attributed to failure on the part of those treating them to use the best available methods, or to failures to comply or engage with treatment on the patient's part. In some two thirds of instances persistent disability was best explained by the fact that even the most suitable available treatments have to be considered only partially effective.

Empirical evidence of bias in the design of experimental stroke studies: a metaepidemiologic approach

Background and Purpose: At least part of the failure in the transition from experimental to clinical studies in stroke has been attributed to the imprecision introduced by problems in the design of experimental stroke studies. Using a metaepidemiologic approach, we addressed the effect of randomization, blinding, and use of comorbid animals on the estimate of how effectively therapeutic interventions reduce infarct size. Methods: Electronic and manual searches were performed to identify meta-analyses that described interventions in experimental stroke. For each meta-analysis thus identified, a reanalysis was conducted to estimate the impact of various quality items on the estimate of efficacy, and these estimates were combined in a meta meta-analysis to obtain a summary measure of the impact of the various design characteristics. Results: Thirteen meta-analyses that described outcomes in 15 635 animals were included. Studies that included unblinded induction of ischemia reported effect sizes 13.1% (95% CI, 26.4% to 0.2%) greater than studies that included blinding, and studies that included healthy animals instead of animals with comorbidities overstated the effect size by 11.5% (95% CI, 21.2% to 1.8%). No significant effect was found for randomization, blinded outcome assessment, or high aggregate CAMARADES quality score. Conclusions: We provide empirical evidence of bias in the design of studies, with studies that included unblinded induction of ischemia or healthy animals overestimating the effectiveness of the intervention. This bias could account for the failure in the transition from bench to bedside of stroke therapies.