促进心理健康研究中行为干预的质量和安全性:来自MAGNET临床试验网络的指南。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Adrienne O'Neil, Tayla John, Alyna Turner, Philip J Batterham, Ayla Barutchu, Rachel Fiddes, Josephine Chambers, Susan L Rossell, Christopher Davey, Sean Carruthers, Madeleine L Connolly, Katherine L Mills, Amelia Gulliver, Orli Schwartz, Erica Neill, Jessica A Davis, Jessica Roydhouse, Michael Berk
{"title":"促进心理健康研究中行为干预的质量和安全性:来自MAGNET临床试验网络的指南。","authors":"Adrienne O'Neil, Tayla John, Alyna Turner, Philip J Batterham, Ayla Barutchu, Rachel Fiddes, Josephine Chambers, Susan L Rossell, Christopher Davey, Sean Carruthers, Madeleine L Connolly, Katherine L Mills, Amelia Gulliver, Orli Schwartz, Erica Neill, Jessica A Davis, Jessica Roydhouse, Michael Berk","doi":"10.1177/00048674251319680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This is the first in a series of Position Papers from the <i>Mental Health Australia General Clinical Trials Network</i> (MAGNET) intended to promote the standard of mental health research in Australia. This paper focuses on improving the quality and safety of non-pharmacological trials with a mental health focus, which for the purpose of this paper, are those testing 'complex' behavioural interventions (including lifestyle or psychotherapy interventions) with clinical populations. This is timely after last year's update of the <i>National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research</i> which is intended to provide extended guidance on assessing, mitigating and managing risk and the introduction of the <i>Australian Commission on Safety & Quality in Healthcare's National Clinical Trials Governance Framework.</i> However, what the implementation of these research policies means for behavioural trials in mental health, given their many nuances, is only being realised. This paper outlines historical issues in the conduct of behavioural trials in mental health (lack of consensus on the concept of harm; lack of governance and inconsistent data collection and/or trial procedures around harms). Next, we detail the methods for developing recommendations to aid triallists' monitoring and assessing safety during the conduct of behavioural mental health trials that evaluate lifestyle or psychotherapy interventions in clinical populations. Finally, we present a decision-making algorithm to support implementation. Ultimately, we intend to promote quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health, to better understand the risk/benefit profile of these treatments and to minimise unnecessary risk to participants and triallists.</p>","PeriodicalId":8589,"journal":{"name":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"315-321"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11924282/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing the quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health research: A how-to guide from the MAGNET Clinical Trial Network.\",\"authors\":\"Adrienne O'Neil, Tayla John, Alyna Turner, Philip J Batterham, Ayla Barutchu, Rachel Fiddes, Josephine Chambers, Susan L Rossell, Christopher Davey, Sean Carruthers, Madeleine L Connolly, Katherine L Mills, Amelia Gulliver, Orli Schwartz, Erica Neill, Jessica A Davis, Jessica Roydhouse, Michael Berk\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00048674251319680\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This is the first in a series of Position Papers from the <i>Mental Health Australia General Clinical Trials Network</i> (MAGNET) intended to promote the standard of mental health research in Australia. This paper focuses on improving the quality and safety of non-pharmacological trials with a mental health focus, which for the purpose of this paper, are those testing 'complex' behavioural interventions (including lifestyle or psychotherapy interventions) with clinical populations. This is timely after last year's update of the <i>National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research</i> which is intended to provide extended guidance on assessing, mitigating and managing risk and the introduction of the <i>Australian Commission on Safety & Quality in Healthcare's National Clinical Trials Governance Framework.</i> However, what the implementation of these research policies means for behavioural trials in mental health, given their many nuances, is only being realised. This paper outlines historical issues in the conduct of behavioural trials in mental health (lack of consensus on the concept of harm; lack of governance and inconsistent data collection and/or trial procedures around harms). Next, we detail the methods for developing recommendations to aid triallists' monitoring and assessing safety during the conduct of behavioural mental health trials that evaluate lifestyle or psychotherapy interventions in clinical populations. Finally, we present a decision-making algorithm to support implementation. Ultimately, we intend to promote quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health, to better understand the risk/benefit profile of these treatments and to minimise unnecessary risk to participants and triallists.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8589,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"315-321\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11924282/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674251319680\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674251319680","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这是澳大利亚心理健康一般临床试验网络(MAGNET)旨在提高澳大利亚心理健康研究标准的一系列立场文件中的第一份。本文的重点是提高以心理健康为重点的非药物试验的质量和安全性,本文的目的是对临床人群进行“复杂”行为干预(包括生活方式或心理治疗干预)的测试。这是在去年人类研究伦理行为国家声明更新后及时发布的,该声明旨在为评估、减轻和管理风险提供扩展指导,并引入了澳大利亚卫生保健安全和质量委员会的国家临床试验治理框架。然而,这些研究政策的实施对心理健康行为试验意味着什么,考虑到它们的许多细微差别,才刚刚意识到。本文概述了心理健康行为试验中存在的历史问题(对伤害的概念缺乏共识;缺乏治理和不一致的数据收集和/或围绕危害的审判程序)。接下来,我们详细介绍了在临床人群中评估生活方式或心理治疗干预的行为心理健康试验过程中,帮助试验人员监测和评估安全性的建议方法。最后,我们提出了一个决策算法来支持实现。最终,我们打算提高心理健康行为干预的质量和安全性,更好地了解这些治疗的风险/收益概况,并尽量减少参与者和试验人员的不必要风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Advancing the quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health research: A how-to guide from the MAGNET Clinical Trial Network.

Advancing the quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health research: A how-to guide from the MAGNET Clinical Trial Network.

Advancing the quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health research: A how-to guide from the MAGNET Clinical Trial Network.

This is the first in a series of Position Papers from the Mental Health Australia General Clinical Trials Network (MAGNET) intended to promote the standard of mental health research in Australia. This paper focuses on improving the quality and safety of non-pharmacological trials with a mental health focus, which for the purpose of this paper, are those testing 'complex' behavioural interventions (including lifestyle or psychotherapy interventions) with clinical populations. This is timely after last year's update of the National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research which is intended to provide extended guidance on assessing, mitigating and managing risk and the introduction of the Australian Commission on Safety & Quality in Healthcare's National Clinical Trials Governance Framework. However, what the implementation of these research policies means for behavioural trials in mental health, given their many nuances, is only being realised. This paper outlines historical issues in the conduct of behavioural trials in mental health (lack of consensus on the concept of harm; lack of governance and inconsistent data collection and/or trial procedures around harms). Next, we detail the methods for developing recommendations to aid triallists' monitoring and assessing safety during the conduct of behavioural mental health trials that evaluate lifestyle or psychotherapy interventions in clinical populations. Finally, we present a decision-making algorithm to support implementation. Ultimately, we intend to promote quality and safety of behavioural interventions in mental health, to better understand the risk/benefit profile of these treatments and to minimise unnecessary risk to participants and triallists.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
149
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry is the official Journal of The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP). The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry is a monthly journal publishing original articles which describe research or report opinions of interest to psychiatrists. These contributions may be presented as original research, reviews, perspectives, commentaries and letters to the editor. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry is the leading psychiatry journal of the Asia-Pacific region.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信