Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised (WAI-SR): psychometric properties in outpatients and inpatients

The Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised (WAI-SR) is a recently refined measure of the therapeutic alliance that assesses three key aspects of the therapeutic alliance: (a) agreement on the tasks of therapy, (b) agreement on the goals of therapy and (c) development of an affective bond. The WAI-SR demonstrated good psychometric properties in an initial validation in psychotherapy outpatients in the USA. The generalizability of these findings is limited because in some countries a substantial portion of individual psychotherapy is delivered in inpatient settings. This study investigated and compared the psychometric properties of the WAI-SR in German outpatients (N = 88) and inpatients (N = 243). In both samples reliability (alpha > 0.80) and convergent validity with the Helping Alliance Questionnaire were good (r > 0.64). Confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable to good model fit for the proposed Bond-Task-Goal model in both samples. Multi-group analysis demonstrated that the same constructs were measured across settings. Alliance ratings of outpatients and inpatients differed regarding the overlap of alliance components and the magnitude of the alliance ratings: The differentiation of the alliance components was poorer in inpatients and they reported lower alliances. Unique aspects of the alliance in inpatient treatment are discussed and a need for further research on the alliance in inpatient settings is pointed out. Overall, the WAI-SR can be recommended for alliance assessment in both settings.

Screening and treatment to prevent sequelae in women with Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection: how much do we know?

Background. An important question for chlamydia control programs is the extent to which finding and treating prevalent, asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection reduces reproductive sequelae in infected women. Methods. We reviewed the literature to critically evaluate evidence on the effect of chlamydia screening on development of sequelae in infected women. Results. Two randomized controlled trials of 1-time screening for chlamydial infection—in a Seattle-area health maintenance organization and a Danish school district—revealed that screening was associated with an ∼50% reduction in the incidence of pelvic inflammatory disease over the following year. However, both of these trials had methodological issues that may have affected the magnitude of observed screening benefits and might limit generalizability to other populations. A large, nonrandomized cohort of chlamydia screening among US Army recruits, although limited by lack of outpatient data, did not find a benefit of similar magnitude to the randomized trials. Methodological limitations restrict valid conclusions about individual benefits of screening using data from historical cohorts and ecological studies. We identified no trials directly evaluating the effect of chlamydia screening on subclinical tubal inflammation or damage, ectopic pregnancy, or tubal factor infertility and no studies addressing the effects of >1 round of screening, the optimal frequency of screening, or the benefits of screening for repeat infections. Conclusions. Additional studies of the effectiveness of chlamydia screening would be valuable; feasible study designs may depend on the degree to which screening programs are already established. In addition, better natural history data on the timing of tubal inflammation and damage after C. trachomatis infection and development of more accurate, noninvasive tools to assess chlamydial sequelae are essential to informing chlamydia control efforts.

Validity evidence and reliability of a Simulated Patient Feedback Instrument

In the training of healthcare professionals, one of the advantages of communication training with simulated patients (SPs) is the SP's ability to provide direct feedback to students after a simulated clinical encounter. The quality of SP feedback must be monitored, especially because it is well known that feedback can have a profound effect on student performance. Due to the current lack of valid and reliable instruments to assess the quality of SP feedback, our study examined the validity and reliability of one potential instrument, the 'modified Quality of Simulated Patient Feedback Form' (mQSF). Methods Content validity of the mQSF was assessed by inviting experts in the area of simulated clinical encounters to rate the importance of the mQSF items. Moreover, generalizability theory was used to examine the reliability of the mQSF. Our data came from videotapes of clinical encounters between six simulated patients and six students and the ensuing feedback from the SPs to the students. Ten faculty members judged the SP feedback according to the items on the mQSF. Three weeks later, this procedure was repeated with the same faculty members and recordings. Results All but two items of the mQSF received importance ratings of > 2.5 on a four-point rating scale. A generalizability coefficient of 0.77 was established with two judges observing one encounter. Conclusions The findings for content validity and reliability with two judges suggest that the mQSF is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the quality of feedback provided by simulated patients.

Integrated care in patients with schizophrenia: results of trials published between 2011 and 2013 focusing on effectiveness and efficiency

Purpose of review: Overview on integrated care trials focusing on effectiveness and efficiency published from 2011 to 2013. Recent findings: Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 21 non-RCT studies were published from 2011 to 2013. Studies differed in several methodological aspects such as study population, psychotherapeutic approaches used, outcome parameters, follow-up times, fidelities, and implementation of the integrated care model and the nation-specific healthcare context with different control conditions. This makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Most studies demonstrated relevant improvements regarding symptoms (P = 0.001) and functioning (P = 0.01), quality of life (P = 0.01), adherence (P <0.05) and patient's satisfaction (P = 0.01), and reduction of caregiver's stress (P < 0.05). Mean total costs were favoring or at least equalizing costs but with positive effects found on subjective health favoring integrated care models. Summary: There is an increasing interest in the effectiveness and efficiency of integrated care models in patients with mental disorders, specifically in those with severe and persistent mental illness. To increase generalizability, future trials should exactly describe rationales and content of integrated care model and control conditions.

Efficacy of psychological therapy in schizophrenia: conclusions from meta-analyses

Over the past years, evidence for the efficacy of psychological therapies in schizophrenia has been summarized in a series of meta-analyses. The present contribution aims to provide a descriptive survey of the evidence for the efficacy of psychological therapies as derived from these meta-analyses and to supplement them by selected findings from an own recent meta-analysis. Relevant meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials were identified by searching several electronic databases and by hand searching of reference lists. In order to compare the findings of the existing meta-analyses, the reported effect sizes were extracted and transformed into a uniform effect size measure where possible. For the own meta-analysis, weighted mean effect size differences between comparison groups regarding various types of outcomes were estimated. Their significance was tested by confidence intervals, and heterogeneity tests were applied to examine the consistency of the effects. From the available meta-analyses, social skills training, cognitive remediation, psychoeducational coping-oriented interventions with families and relatives, as well as cognitive behavioral therapy of persistent positive symptoms emerge as effective adjuncts to pharmacotherapy. Social skills training consistently effectuates the acquisition of social skills, cognitive remediation leads to short-term improvements in cognitive functioning, family interventions decrease relapse and hospitalization rates, and cognitive behavioral therapy results in a reduction of positive symptoms. These benefits seem to be accompanied by slight improvements in social functioning. However, open questions remain as to the specific therapeutic ingredients, to the synergistic effects, to the indication, as well as to the generalizability of the findings to routine care.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalizability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies.The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers.This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed "Explanation and Elaboration" document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies. We convened a two-day workshop, in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

A coronary heart disease risk model for predicting the effect of potent antiretroviral therapy in HIV-1 infected men

BACKGROUND: Many HIV-infected patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) experience metabolic complications including dyslipidaemia and insulin resistance, which may increase their coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. We developed a prognostic model for CHD tailored to the changes in risk factors observed in patients starting HAART. METHODS: Data from five cohort studies (British Regional Heart Study, Caerphilly and Speedwell Studies, Framingham Offspring Study, Whitehall II) on 13,100 men aged 40-70 and 114,443 years of follow up were used. CHD was defined as myocardial infarction or death from CHD. Model fit was assessed using the Akaike Information Criterion; generalizability across cohorts was examined using internal-external cross-validation. RESULTS: A parametric model based on the Gompertz distribution generalized best. Variables included in the model were systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, glucose, diabetes mellitus, body mass index and smoking status. Compared with patients not on HAART, the estimated CHD hazard ratio (HR) for patients on HAART was 1.46 (95% CI 1.15-1.86) for moderate and 2.48 (95% CI 1.76-3.51) for severe metabolic complications. CONCLUSIONS: The change in the risk of CHD in HIV-infected men starting HAART can be estimated based on typical changes in risk factors, assuming that HRs estimated using data from non-infected men are applicable to HIV-infected men. Based on this model the risk of CHD is likely to increase, but increases may often be modest, and could be offset by lifestyle changes.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover 3 main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors, to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all 3 study designs and 4 are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available at http://www.annals.org and on the Web sites of PLoS Medicine and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

An interfering Go/No-go task does not affect accuracy in a Concealed Information Test

Following the idea that response inhibition processes play a central role in concealing information, the present study investigated the influence of a Go/No-go task as an interfering mental activity, performed parallel to the Concealed Information Test (CIT), on the detectability of concealed information. 40 undergraduate students participated in a mock-crime experiment and simultaneously performed a CIT and a Go/No-go task. Electrodermal activity (EDA), respiration line length (RLL), heart rate (HR) and finger pulse waveform length (FPWL) were registered. Reaction times were recorded as behavioral measures in the Go/No-go task as well as in the CIT. As a within-subject control condition, the CIT was also applied without an additional task. The parallel task did not influence the mean differences of the physiological measures of the mock-crime-related probe and the irrelevant items. This finding might possibly be due to the fact that the applied parallel task induced a tonic rather than a phasic mental activity, which did not influence differential responding to CIT items. No physiological evidence for an interaction between the parallel task and sub-processes of deception (e.g. inhibition) was found. Subjects' performance in the Go/No-go parallel task did not contribute to the detection of concealed information. Generalizability needs further investigations of different variations of the parallel task.

Development of a screening tool predicting the transition from acute to chronic low back pain for patients in a GP setting: protocol of a multinational prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is by far the most prevalent and costly musculoskeletal problem in our society today. Following the recommendations of the Multinational Musculoskeletal Inception Cohort Study (MMICS) Statement, our study aims to define outcome assessment tools for patients with acute LBP and the time point at which chronic LBP becomes manifest and to identify patient characteristics which increase the risk of chronicity. METHODS: Patients with acute LBP will be recruited from clinics of general practitioners (GPs) in New Zealand (NZ) and Switzerland (CH). They will be assessed by postal survey at baseline and at 3, 6, 12 weeks and 6 months follow-up. Primary outcome will be disability as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); key secondary endpoints will be general health as measured by the acute SF-12 and pain as measured on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A subgroup analysis of different assessment instruments and baseline characteristics will be performed using multiple linear regression models. This study aims to examine: 1. Which biomedical, psychological, social, and occupational outcome assessment tools are identifiers for the transition from acute to chronic LBP and at which time point this transition becomes manifest. 2. Which psychosocial and occupational baseline characteristics like work status and period of work absenteeism influence the course from acute to chronic LBP. 3. Differences in outcome assessment tools and baseline characteristics of patients in NZ compared with CH. DISCUSSION: This study will develop a screening tool for patients with acute LBP to be used in GP clinics to access the risk of developing chronic LBP. In addition, biomedical, psychological, social, and occupational patient characteristics which influence the course from acute to chronic LBP will be identified. Furthermore, an appropriate time point for follow-ups will be given to detect this transition. The generalizability of our findings will be enhanced by the international perspective of this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [Clinical Trial Registration Number, ACTRN12608000520336].

[The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting of observational studies]

Much of biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

Much of biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

STROBE Statement: linee guida per descrivere gli studi osservazionali

Much of biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study’s generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, casecontrol, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed “Explanation and Elaboration” document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.