10 results
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
The impact of routine outcome measurement on treatment processes in community mental health care: approach and methods of the MECCA study
- Stefan Priebe, Rosemarie McCabe, Jens Bullenkamp, Lars Hansson, Wulf Rössler, Francisco Torres-Gonzales, Durk Wiersma
-
- Journal:
- Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale / Volume 11 / Issue 3 / September 2002
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 11 October 2011, pp. 198-205
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Three issues characterise the background to the MECCA study: A) Throughout Europe, most patients with severe forms of psychotic disorders are cared for in the community. The challenge now is to make processes in community mental health care more effective. B) There are widespread calls to implement regular outcome measurement in routine settings. This, however, is more likely to happen, if it provides a direct benefit to clinicians and patients. C) Whilst user involvement is relatively ?" easy to achieve on a political level, new mechanisms may have to be established to make the views of patients feed into individual treatment decisions. The MECCA study is a cluster randomised controlled trial following the same protocol in community mental health teams in six European countries. In the experimental group, patients' subjective quality of life, treatment satisfaction and wishes for different or additional help are assessed in key worker-patient meetings every two months and intended to inform the therapeutic dialogue and treatment decisions. The trial tests the hypothesis that the intervention – as compared to current best standard practice – will lead to a better outcome in terms of quality of life and other criteria in patients with psychotic disorders over a one year period. This more favourable outcome is assumed to be mediated through different treatment input based on more appropriate joint decisions or a more positive therapeutic relationship in line with a partnership model of care or both. Moreover, the study will hopefully reveal new insights into how therapeutic processes in community mental health care work and how they can be optimised.
Aetiology of depression and schizophrenia: current views of British psychiatrists
- Dave Baillie, Rosemarie McCabe, Stefan Priebe
-
- Journal:
- Psychiatric Bulletin / Volume 33 / Issue 10 / October 2009
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. 374-377
- Print publication:
- October 2009
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Aims and Method
A postal survey assessed current views of a random sample of 154 British psychiatrists on aetiological factors in depression and schizophrenia.
ResultsGenetics, biochemical abnormalities and substance misuse were considered important factors in both illnesses. Beyond that, psychiatrists varied widely in their views. Depression was viewed as a more multifactorial condition with psychological/social factors more important, whereas biological factors were considered more important in schizophrenia. Aetiological factors were thought to vary more in depression than in schizophrenia and discussing them was seen as more important in patients with depression.
Clinical ImplicationsPsychiatrists' attitudes are likely to influence treatment. Patients may encounter different views depending on their illness and on the particular psychiatrist's views.
Structured patient–clinician communication and 1-year outcome in community mental healthcare: Cluster randomised controlled trial
- Stefan Priebe, Rosemarie McCabe, Jens Bullenkamp, Lars Hansson, Christoph Lauber, Rafael Martinez-Leal, Wulf Rössler, Hans Salize, Bengt Svensson, Francisco Torres-Gonzales, Rob Van Den Brink, Durk Wiersma, Donna J. Wright
-
- Journal:
- The British Journal of Psychiatry / Volume 191 / Issue 5 / November 2007
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. 420-426
- Print publication:
- November 2007
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Patient–clinician communication is central to mental healthcare but neglected in research.
AimsTo test a new computer-mediated intervention structuring patient–clinician dialogue (DIALOG) focusing on patients' quality of life and needs for care.
MethodIn a cluster randomised controlled trial, 134 keyworkers in six countries were allocated to DIALOG or treatment as usual; 507 people with schizophrenia or related disorders were included. Every 2 months for 1 year, clinicians asked patients to rate satisfaction with quality of life and treatment, and request additional or different support. Responses were fed back immediately in screen displays, compared with previous ratings and discussed. Primary outcome was subjective quality of life, and secondary outcomes were unmet needs and treatment satisfaction.
ResultsOf 507 patients, 56 were lost to follow-up and 451 were included in intention-to-treat analyses. Patients receiving the DIALOG intervention had better subjective quality of life, fewer unmet needs and higher treatment satisfaction after 12 months.
ConclusionsStructuring patient–clinician dialogue to focus on patients' views positively influenced quality of life, needs for care and treatment satisfaction.
Patient-reported outcomes in schizophrenia
- Rosemarie McCabe, Marya Saidi, Stefan Priebe
-
- Journal:
- The British Journal of Psychiatry / Volume 191 / Issue S50 / August 2007
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. s21-s28
- Print publication:
- August 2007
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Patient-reported outcomes are increasingly used to evaluate the care of people with schizophrenia
AimsTo review established and emerging patient-reported outcomes in schizophrenia research, assessment tools and key findings
MethodA non-systematic review addressing relevant constructs, the associated scales and key empirical findings
ResultsPatient-reported outcomes in schizophrenia relate either to evaluation of illness and benef it from treatment or to resilience of the self. Of the former, needs for care, treatment satisfaction and the therapeutic relationship are most common. Less common are symptoms, insight, attitude towards medication, and clinical communication. Increasing expectations of treatment have led to new measures assessing resilience of the self, including empowerment, self-esteem, sense of coherence and recovery Scores of different patient-related outcomes overlap and are influenced by a general tendency, largely influenced by mood, for more or less positive appraisal
ConclusionsThe conceptual and empirical basis for different patient-reported outcomes varies, with most data available for treatment satisfaction. More than one such outcome should be used only if there is a specific hypothesis. For new patient-reported outcomes, relative independence from existing constructs should be demonstrated
A new scale to assess the therapeutic relationship in community mental health care: STAR
- REBECCA McGUIRE-SNIECKUS, ROSEMARIE McCABE, JOCELYN CATTY, LARS HANSSON, STEFAN PRIEBE
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 37 / Issue 1 / January 2007
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 09 November 2006, pp. 85-95
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Background. No instrument has been developed specifically for assessing the clinician–patient therapeutic relationship (TR) in community psychiatry. This study aimed to develop a measure of the TR with clinician and patient versions using psychometric principles for test construction.
Method. A four-stage prospective study was undertaken, comprising qualitative semi-structured interviews about TRs with clinicians and patients and their assessment of nine established scales for their applicability to community care, administering an amalgamated scale of more than 100 items, followed by Principal Components Analysis (PCA) of these ratings for preliminary scale construction, test–retest reliability of the scale and administering the scale in a new sample to confirm its factorial structure. The sample consisted of patients with severe mental illness and a designated key worker in the care of 17 community mental health teams in England and Sweden.
Results. New items not covered by established scales were identified, including clinician helpfulness in accessing services, patient aggression and family interference. The new patient (STAR-P) and clinician scales (STAR-C) each have 12 items comprising three subscales: positive collaboration and positive clinician input in both versions, non-supportive clinician input in the patient version, and emotional difficulties in the clinician version. Test–retest reliability was r=0·76 for STAR-P and r=0·68 for STAR-C. The factorial structure of the new scale was confirmed with a good fit.
Conclusions. STAR is a specifically developed, brief scale to assess TRs in community psychiatry with good psychometric properties and is suitable for use in research and routine care.
Effectiveness and costs of acute day hospital treatment compared with conventional in-patient care: Randomised controlled trial
- Stefan Priebe, Gemma Jones, Rosemarie McCabe, Jane Briscoe, Donna Wright, Michelle Sleed, Jennifer Beecham
-
- Journal:
- The British Journal of Psychiatry / Volume 188 / Issue 3 / March 2006
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. 243-249
- Print publication:
- March 2006
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Data on effectiveness of acute day hospital treatment for psychiatric illness are inconsistent.
AimsTo establish the effectiveness and costs of care in a day hospital providing acute treatment exclusively.
MethodIn a randomised controlled trial, 206 voluntarily admitted patients were allocated to either day hospital treatment or conventional wards. Psychopathology, treatment satisfaction and subjective quality of life at discharge, 3 months and 12 months after discharge, readmissions to acute psychiatric treatment within 3 and 12 months, and costs in the index treatment period were taken as outcome criteria.
ResultsDay hospital patients showed significantly more favourable changes in psychopathology at discharge but not at follow-up. They also reported higher treatment satisfaction at discharge and after 3 months, but not after 12 months. There were no significant differences in subjective quality of life or in readmissions during follow-up. Mean total support costs were higher for the day hospital group.
ConclusionsDay hospital treatment for voluntary psychiatric patients in an inner-city area appears more effective in terms of reducing psychopathology in the short term and generates greater patient satisfaction than conventional in-patient care, but may be more costly.
Explanatory models of illness in schizophrenia: Comparison of four ethnic groups
- Rosemarie McCabe, Stefan Priebe
-
- Journal:
- The British Journal of Psychiatry / Volume 185 / Issue 1 / July 2004
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. 25-30
- Print publication:
- July 2004
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Explanatory models of illness may differ between ethnic groups and influence treatment satisfaction and compliance.
AimsTo compare explanatory models among people with schizophrenia from four cultural backgrounds and explore their relationship with clinical and psychological characteristics.
MethodExplanatory models, insight, treatment compliance, health locus of control, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, therapeutic relationships and symptomatology were assessed in UK Whites and Bangladeshis, African-Caribbeans and West Africans.
ResultsWhen biological and supernatural causes of illness were compared, Whites cited biological causes more frequently than the three non-White groups, who cited supernatural causes more frequently. When biological and social causes were compared, Whites cited biological causes more frequently than African-Caribbeans and Bangladeshis, who cited social causes more frequently. A biological explanatory model was related to enhanced treatment satisfaction and therapeutic relationships but not treatment compliance.
ConclusionsExplanatory models of illness contribute to patient satisfaction with treatment and relationships with clinicians.
A national survey of psychiatric day hospitals
- Jane Briscoe, Rosemarie McCabe, Stefan Priebe, Thomas Kallert
-
- Journal:
- Psychiatric Bulletin / Volume 28 / Issue 5 / May 2004
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. 160-163
- Print publication:
- May 2004
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Aims and Method
We conducted a postal questionnaire survey of all psychiatric day hospitals in England to identify the range of aims, organisational structure and content of service provision.
ResultsOf 102 identified day hospitals, 77% responded to the questionnaire. The findings confirmed that there is great heterogeneity in English day hospital service provision. The function or aim with the highest mean rating was ‘providing an alternative to in-patient care’, with 66% of day hospitals giving this a rating of great or greatest importance. However, the majority of respondents prioritised multiple roles, with many day hospitals aiming to provide acute and chronic care concurrently.
Clinical ImplicationsThe label ‘day hospital’ covers a considerable range of community psychiatric services. The heterogeneity of service provision in existing day hospitals could lead to difficulties in generalising research findings on day hospital efficacy.
Patient, client or service user? A survey of patient preferences of dress and address of six mental health professions
- Rebecca Mcguire-Snieckus, Rosemarie Mccabe, Stefan Priebe
-
- Journal:
- Psychiatric Bulletin / Volume 27 / Issue 8 / August 2003
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 January 2018, pp. 305-308
- Print publication:
- August 2003
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Aims and Method
A positive therapeutic relationship is essential to psychiatry and should take into account patients' preferences. Preferences of 133 community care patients were surveyed regarding dress and forms of address of six professions. Participants' sex, age, ethnicity and diagnosis were recorded.
ResultsNinety-eight per cent of participants expressed a preference. While most preferred to be called ‘patients' by general practitioners (75%) and psychiatrists (67%), there was no statistically significant difference in preference for the term ‘patient’ or ‘client’ when used by community psychiatric nurses, occupational therapists, psychologists or social workers. Participants over the age of 40 preferred the term ‘client’. Asymmetrical relationships were preferred with general practitioners and psychiatrists, evidenced by a preference to be addressed by first name (71% and 68%, respectively), to address the professional by title (81% and 80%, respectively), and the professional to be ‘smartly’ dressed (67% and 66%, respectively).
Clinical ImplicationsA more differentiated approach may be suggested by taking professional background and some demographic characteristics into consideration.