↓ Skip to main content

The development and evaluation of a computerized decision aid for the treatment of psychotic disorders

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
7 tweeters
1 Facebook page


9 Dimensions

Readers on

55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
The development and evaluation of a computerized decision aid for the treatment of psychotic disorders
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12888-018-1750-7
Pubmed ID

Magda Tasma, Lukas O. Roebroek, Edith J. Liemburg, Henderikus Knegtering, Philippe A. Delespaul, Albert Boonstra, Marte Swart, Stynke Castelein


Routinely monitoring of symptoms and medical needs can improve the diagnostics and treatment of medical problems, including psychiatric. However, several studies show that few clinicians use Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) in their daily work. We describe the development and first evaluation of a ROM based computerized clinical decision aid, Treatment-E-Assist (TREAT) for the treatment of psychotic disorders. The goal is to generate personalized treatment recommendations, based on international guidelines combined with outcomes of mental and physical health acquired through ROM. We present a pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility of this computerized clinical decision aid in daily clinical practice by evaluating clinicians' experiences with the system. Clinical decision algorithms were developed based on international schizophrenia treatment guidelines and the input of multidisciplinary expert panels from multiple psychiatric institutes. Yearly obtained diagnostic (ROM) information of patients was presented to treating clinicians combined with treatment suggestions generated by the algorithms of TREAT. In this pilot study 6 clinicians and 16 patients of Lentis Psychiatric Institute used the application. Clinicians were interviewed and asked to fill out self-report questionnaires evaluating their opinions about ROM and the effectiveness of TREAT. Six clinicians and 16 patients with psychotic disorders participated in the pilot study. The clinicians were psychiatrists, physicians and nurse-practitioners which all worked at least 8 years in mental health care of which at least 3 years treating patients with psychotic illnesses. All Clinicians found TREAT easy to use and would like to continue using the application. They reported that TREAT offered support in using diagnostic ROM information when drafting the treatment plans, by creating more awareness of current treatment options. This article presents a pilot study on the implementation of a computerized clinical decision aid linking routine outcome monitoring to clinical guidelines in order to generate personalized treatment advice. TREAT was found to be feasible for daily clinical practice and effective based on this first evaluation by clinicians. However, adjustments have to be made to the system and algorithms of the application. The ultimate goal is to provide appropriate evidence based care for patients with severe mental illnesses.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Librarian 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 16 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 18 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 December 2018.
All research outputs
of 14,537,474 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
of 3,401 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 277,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,537,474 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,401 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,903 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them