Better Safe Than Sorry. A Scoping Review of Monitoring for Negative Effects in Preregistrations of Psychological Interventions

Author:

Jeckel Jacoba1,Thiele Christian2,Hirschfeld Gerrit2,Teismann Tobias1ORCID,Schneider Silvia1,von Brachel Ruth1

Affiliation:

1. Mental Health Research and Treatment Center Ruhr University Bochum Bochum Germany

2. Faculty of Business University of Applied Sciences Bielefeld Bielefeld Germany

Abstract

ABSTRACTAlthough negative effects of psychological interventions are suspected to be common, they are rarely investigated. Experts and international guidelines agree that monitoring for negative effects in clinical studies is needed to make psychological interventions safer and to empower patients before they give their consent to participate. Therefore, monitoring should already be considered during planning and preregistration of a study. The aim of this scoping review was to find out how frequently studies on psychological interventions monitor their negative effects according to preregistrations and to investigate reasons why monitoring is not carried out. Preregistrations of psychological interventions on ClinicalTrials.gov were scrutinized for information on monitoring of negative effects and other study characteristics. In a survey, researchers of studies where no monitoring was reported were asked for reasons for not doing so. Overall, 2231 preregistrations of psychological interventions were found; of these, only 3.4% included explicit information on monitoring for negative effects. In the survey, more researchers reported having conducted monitoring, although the type of monitoring was often inadequate. The type of monitoring varied widely, and specific monitoring measurements were rarely used repeatedly. Monitoring for negative effects was more prevalent in studies investigating treatments versus low‐threshold interventions, in studies conducted in Europe versus other continents and in more recent studies. Researchers reported lack of knowledge as the most frequent reason for not monitoring negative effects. Our results imply a lack of monitoring and inconsistent information on negative effects in preregistrations, with inconsistent use of the term monitoring and measurements, and a lack of knowledge among researchers. Improved knowledge and a standardized approach, starting with an adequate preregistration, would be helpful to routinely examine negative effects in psychological interventions to make them safer and better.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3