A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Measuring professional stigma towards patients with a forensic mental health status: protocol for a Delphi consensus study on the design of a questionnaire. | LitMetric

Introduction: Negative attitudes towards individuals with a mental illness and/or criminal background are widely studied, but empirical interest in the attitudes towards patients with a forensic mental health status is lacking. Negative attitudes among mental healthcare (MHC) professionals can have a significant impact on treatment outcomes and hence, affect patients' rehabilitation. This study will elaborate an instrument to assess stigmatising attitudes among community MHC professionals towards patients with a forensic mental health status.

Methods And Analysis: The instrument will be developed by means of a Delphi study and depart from pre-existing instruments that assess public and professional stigma towards individuals with a mental illness and/or criminal background. Relevant instruments were identified through a targeted literature review. A longlist of items has been selected for the Delphi survey. Five expert panels (ie, academic experience in stigma or forensic MHC, clinical experience in community or forensic MHC or patient experience in forensic and community MHC) will be asked to score the relevance of each item on a 7-point Likert scale and to agree on the wording (yes/no). Participants will be provided with the option to suggest additional items or alternative wording. Adapted Delphi methodology will be applied with an expectation of at least three rounds to achieve consensus: ≥60% of the participants of at least four of five expert panels rank the item in the top three (inclusion) or bottom three (exclusion). Items will be reworded for a consecutive round based on a 'yes minus no' score and participants' suggestions.

Ethics And Dissemination: This study has been approved by the ethics committee of Fundación Sant Joan de Déu. Dissemination of results will be through peer-reviewed publications, presentations and (inter-)national academic conferences. A summary of the results will be shared with the participants and key persons in community and forensic MHC.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9438202PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061160DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

patients forensic
12
forensic mental
12
mental health
12
forensic mhc
12
professional stigma
8
health status
8
negative attitudes
8
individuals mental
8
mental illness
8
illness and/or
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!