We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
It is essential to conduct randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions on acute psychiatric wards to build a robust evidence base for clinical practice.
Aims
This paper aims to share strategies from three different in-patient trials that successfully recruited and retained participants, to disseminate good practice for the conduct of future trials in this challenging and complex clinical setting.
Method
We present strategies from three in-patient trials of psychological interventions: TULIPS (Talk, Understand, Listen for Inpatient Settings), amBITION (Brief Talking Therapies on Wards) and INSITE (Inpatient Suicide Intervention and Therapy Evaluation). All studies recruited participants from acute in-patient wards, initiated therapy within the in-patient setting and followed up on participants post-discharge.
Results
We summarise our recommendations for good practice in the form of ten top tips for success, based on our collective experience of conducting trials on psychiatric wards. Key themes relate to the importance of relationships between the research team and clinical staff; good stakeholder involvement and getting early buy-in from the team; and adapting to the particular demands of the clinical setting.
Conclusions
Sharing good practice recommendations can help reduce research waste arising from poor recruitment and/or retention in future in-patient clinical trials.
This chapter defines the main experimental designs possible with lesion methods and discusses both the strengths and weaknesses of these techniques. Lesion studies remain a crucial part of the experimental toolbox in this field because of the nature of evidence that can be obtained with this method. These studies offer particular inferential strengths, complementing other approaches. Human lesion studies are at best quasiexperimental. Most studies in affective neuroscience make use of novel behavioral measures and so usually require a reference group made up of healthy subjects demographically similar to the target patient population to help interpret the performance of the patient group. Region-of-interest (ROI) studies often involve both a healthy reference group and a brain-damaged control group. Lesion studies have made many interesting contributions to affective neuroscience and are especially important in building a converging evidence base for the brain basis of complex processes.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.