19 resultados para risk assessments


Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective: Section III of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) lists attenuated psychosis syndrome as a condition for further study. One important question is its prevalence and clinical significance in the general population. Method: Analyses involved 1229 participants (age 16-40 years) from the general population of Canton Bern, Switzerland, enrolled from June 2011 to July 2012. "Symptom," "onset/worsening," "frequency," and "distress/disability" criteria of attenuated psychosis syndrome were assessed using the structured interview for psychosis-risk syndromes. Furthermore, help-seeking, psychosocial functioning, and current nonpsychotic axis I disorders were surveyed. Well-trained psychologists performed assessments using the computer-assisted telephone interviewing technique. Results: The symptom criterion was met by 12.9% of participants, onset/worsening by 1.1%, frequency by 3.8%, and distress/disability by 7.0%. Symptom, frequency, and distress/disability were met by 3.2%. Excluding trait-like attenuated psychotic symptoms (APS) decreased the prevalence to 2.6%, while adding onset/worsening reduced it to 0.3%. APS were associated with functional impairments, current mental disorders, and help-seeking although they were not a reason for help-seeking. These associations were weaker for attenuated psychosis syndrome. Conclusions: At the population level, only 0.3% met current attenuated psychosis syndrome criteria. Particularly, the onset/worsening criterion, originally included to increase the likelihood of progression to psychosis, lowered its prevalence. Because progression is not required for a self-contained syndrome, a revision of the restrictive onset criterion is proposed to avoid the exclusion of 2.3% of persons who experience and are distressed by APS from mental health care. Secondary analyses suggest that a revised syndrome would also possess higher clinical significance than the current syndrome.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVES To test the inter-rater reliability of the RoB tool applied to Physical Therapy (PT) trials by comparing ratings from Cochrane review authors with those of blinded external reviewers. METHODS Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PT were identified by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for meta-analysis of PT interventions. RoB assessments were conducted independently by 2 reviewers blinded to the RoB ratings reported in the Cochrane reviews. Data on RoB assessments from Cochrane reviews and other characteristics of reviews and trials were extracted. Consensus assessments between the two reviewers were then compared with the RoB ratings from the Cochrane reviews. Agreement between Cochrane and blinded external reviewers was assessed using weighted kappa (κ). RESULTS In total, 109 trials included in 17 Cochrane reviews were assessed. Inter-rater reliability on the overall RoB assessment between Cochrane review authors and blinded external reviewers was poor (κ  =  0.02, 95%CI: -0.06, 0.06]). Inter-rater reliability on individual domains of the RoB tool was poor (median κ  = 0.19), ranging from κ  =  -0.04 ("Other bias") to κ  =  0.62 ("Sequence generation"). There was also no agreement (κ  =  -0.29, 95%CI: -0.81, 0.35]) in the overall RoB assessment at the meta-analysis level. CONCLUSIONS Risk of bias assessments of RCTs using the RoB tool are not consistent across different research groups. Poor agreement was not only demonstrated at the trial level but also at the meta-analysis level. Results have implications for decision making since different recommendations can be reached depending on the group analyzing the evidence. Improved guidelines to consistently apply the RoB tool and revisions to the tool for different health areas are needed.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND The Cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool has been widely embraced by the systematic review community, but several studies have reported that its reliability is low. We aim to investigate whether training of raters, including objective and standardized instructions on how to assess risk of bias, can improve the reliability of this tool. We describe the methods that will be used in this investigation and present an intensive standardized training package for risk of bias assessment that could be used by contributors to the Cochrane Collaboration and other reviewers. METHODS/DESIGN This is a pilot study. We will first perform a systematic literature review to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that will be used for risk of bias assessment. Using the identified RCTs, we will then do a randomized experiment, where raters will be allocated to two different training schemes: minimal training and intensive standardized training. We will calculate the chance-corrected weighted Kappa with 95% confidence intervals to quantify within- and between-group Kappa agreement for each of the domains of the risk of bias tool. To calculate between-group Kappa agreement, we will use risk of bias assessments from pairs of raters after resolution of disagreements. Between-group Kappa agreement will quantify the agreement between the risk of bias assessment of raters in the training groups and the risk of bias assessment of experienced raters. To compare agreement of raters under different training conditions, we will calculate differences between Kappa values with 95% confidence intervals. DISCUSSION This study will investigate whether the reliability of the risk of bias tool can be improved by training raters using standardized instructions for risk of bias assessment. One group of inexperienced raters will receive intensive training on risk of bias assessment and the other will receive minimal training. By including a control group with minimal training, we will attempt to mimic what many review authors commonly have to do, that is-conduct risk of bias assessment in RCTs without much formal training or standardized instructions. If our results indicate that an intense standardized training does improve the reliability of the RoB tool, our study is likely to help improve the quality of risk of bias assessments, which is a central component of evidence synthesis.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Early detection of psychosis is an important topic in psychiatry. Yet, there is limited information on the prevalence and clinical significance of high-risk symptoms in children and adolescents as compared to adults. We examined ultra-high-risk (UHR) symptoms and criteria in a sample of individuals aged 8-40 years from the general population of Canton Bern, Switzerland, enrolled from June 2011 to May 2014. The current presence of attenuated psychotic symptoms (APS) and brief intermittent psychotic symptoms (BLIPS) and the fulfillment of onset/worsening and frequency requirements for these symptoms in UHR criteria were assessed using the Structured Interview for Psychosis Risk Syndromes. Additionally, perceptive and non-perceptive APS were differentiated. Psychosocial functioning and current non-psychotic DSM-IV axis I disorders were also surveyed. Well-trained psychologists performed assessments. Altogether, 9.9% of subjects reported APS and none BLIPS, and 1.3% met all the UHR requirements for APS. APS were related to more current axis I disorders and impaired psychosocial functioning, indicating some clinical significance. A strong age effect was detected around age 16: compared to older individuals, 8-15-year olds reported more perceptive APS, that is, unusual perceptual experiences and attenuated hallucinations. Perceptive APS were generally less related to functional impairment, regardless of age. Conversely, non-perceptive APS were related to low functioning, although this relationship was weaker in those below age 16. Future studies should address the differential effects of perceptive and non-perceptive APS, and their interaction with age, also in terms of conversion to psychosis.