ArticleJMIR research protocols2026
Acceptability of the Cardiff Online Cognitive Assessment for Clinical Screening of Patients With Psychosis: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The early detection of cognitive impairments in individuals with psychosis offers a means to support clinical and functional recovery. However, there are significant barriers to assessing cognition in clinical services, including lack of staff time, training, and confidence in administering assessments. We have developed the Cardiff Online Cognitive Assessment (CONCA), aiming to address these barriers, and here present the protocol to assess its acceptability as a clinical tool. Objective: The aim of this study is to conduct the early-stage testing of the CONCA as a clinical tool to determine whether it is acceptable to young people with a history of psychosis and to health professionals. Methods: This cross-sectional study will use a mixed methods approach. A total of 100 young people with a history of psychosis will complete the CONCA and an acceptability questionnaire. We will conduct qualitative interviews with a minimum of 20 participants with psychosis and 10 participants with professional experience of working in early intervention in psychosis services to explore opinions on the CONCA as a clinical tool, attitudes toward and barriers or facilitators of implementing the CONCA, and cognitive testing more generally in clinical services. Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and linear or logistic regression. Qualitative interviews will be analyzed using a deductive thematic analysis approach. Results: The enrollment of study participants started in July 2025 and is expected to end in October 2026. Data analysis is expected to be finalized by March 2027. As of September 15, 2025, we have enrolled 26 participants with psychosis in the quantitative arm of the study, and 4 participants with psychosis and 1 health professional in the qualitative arm. Conclusions: Our results will provide new data on the acceptability of the CONCA and cognitive testing more generally among patients and clinicians, as well as identify barriers and facilitators to the CONCA's implementation. This will provide the groundwork for a larger hybrid effectiveness-implementation study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.