Research priorities set by people with OCD and OCD researchers: Do the commonalities outweigh the differences?

OBJECTIVE: In contrast to research agendas being predominantly set by scientists or funders, a collaborative approach was used to spot future goals for research on obsessive-compulsive disorder. METHODS: First, we conducted a meta-review and then compared the results of two online surveys with OCD professionals and patients on research priorities. The literature search was performed in three comprehensive databases, and ten research goals were extracted. Sixty-four patients and eight professionals responded to open questions on their five most important goals. Then, they ranked the ten aims extracted from the literature on a 6-point Likert scale. RESULTS: For patients and professionals, research on treatment gains that persist long-term was most important. Concerning the top five goals listed in an open format, for patients, development and maintenance of the disease was as important as psychotherapy and its efficacy. In contrast, for professionals, the efficacy and the optimization of psychotherapy were the far most important research goals. CONCLUSIONS: We proposed one possibility to involve patients in OCD research, and the multitude of answers presents a wealth of research ideas. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Since consistent research involvement may contribute to its clinical impact, researchers are now invited to translate our findings into empirical studies.

Standardized Patients in Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy: a Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators for Implementation.

OBJECTIVES: The use of simulated and standardized patients (SP) is widely accepted in the medical field and, from there, is beginning to disseminate into clinical psychology and psychotherapy. The purpose of this study was therefore to systematically review barriers and facilitators that should be considered in the implementation of SP interventions specific to clinical psychology and psychotherapy. METHODS: Following current guidelines, a scoping review was conducted. The literature search focused on the MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, including Dissertation Abstracts International. After screening for titles and abstracts, full texts were screened independently and in duplicate according to our inclusion criteria. For data extraction, a pre-defined form was piloted and used. Units of meaning with respect to barriers and facilitators were extracted and categorized inductively using content-analysis techniques. From the results, a matrix of interconnections and a network graph were compiled. RESULTS: The 41 included publications were mainly in the fields of psychiatry and mental health nursing, as well as in training and education. The detailed category system contrasts four supercategories, i.e., which organizational and economic aspects to consider, which persons to include as eligible SPs, how to develop adequate scenarios, and how to authentically and consistently portray mental health patients. CONCLUSIONS: Publications focused especially on the interrelation between authenticity and consistency of portrayals, on how to evoke empathy in learners, and on economic and training aspects. A variety of recommendations for implementing SP programs, from planning to training, monitoring, and debriefing, is provided, for example, ethical screening of and ongoing support for SPs.