ArticleScandinavian journal of caring sciences2026
Key Strategies for Improving Psychiatric Home-Based Care in Spain: A Modified Delphi Study.
Article in Scandinavian journal of caring sciences, 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
aimsThis study aimed to identify and prioritize key strategies for improving a psychiatric home-based care programme, the Crisis Resolution and Home Treatment (CRHT) intervention in Catalonia, Spain. The objective was to incorporate the perspectives of service users, family caregivers and healthcare professionals to guide quality improvement efforts.
methodsA modified Delphi method was used to reach consensus among stakeholders previously involved in a qualitative evaluation of the CRHT programme. The expert panel included 130 participants: 31 CRHT service users/caregivers and 99 healthcare professionals. Over three rounds of online surveys, participants rated 18 pre-identified improvement strategies across three dimensions: problem significance, change agency and feasibility of change. Service users and caregivers assessed only problem significance. Open-ended responses were also collected and analysed.
findingsConsensus was reached in the third round, with five strategies prioritized: (1) training on CRHT referral and eligibility criteria, (2) standardized discharge and continuity of care protocols, (3) feedback loop between CRHT and referring professionals, (4) scheduling and communication of visiting hours, and (5) available updates for CRHT slots. These areas were rated highest in terms of feasibility and change agency, though not necessarily in problem significance. Notably, the same individuals who participated in the initial qualitative phase contributed to the prioritization process, ensuring continuity and relevance in stakeholder input.
conclusionThe study demonstrates the value of collaborative, consensus-based approaches to quality improvement in mental health care. Prioritized strategies reflect feasible and actionable areas for enhancing CRHT services. Involving service users, caregivers and professionals in both evaluation and decision-making processes strengthens the relevance, person-centredness and effectiveness of care. Implementation of these strategies is underway, with further improvements planned based on stakeholder feedback and continuous assessment.
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.