Explore the vast range of titles available.

Cause-of-death data derived from verbal autopsy (VA) are increasingly used for health planning, priority setting, monitoring and evaluation in countries with incomplete or no vital registration systems. In some regions of the world it is the only method available to obtain estimates on the distribution of causes of death. Currently, the VA method is routinely used at over 35 sites, mainly in Africa and Asia. In this paper, we present an overview of the VA process and the results of a review of VA tools and operating procedures used at demographic surveillance sites and sample vital registration systems. We asked for information from 36 field sites about field-operating procedures and reviewed 18 verbal autopsy questionnaires and 10 cause-of-death lists used in 13 countries. The format and content of VA questionnaires, field-operating procedures, cause-of-death lists and the procedures to derive causes of death from VA process varied substantially among sites. We discuss the consequences of using varied methods and conclude that the VA tools and procedures must be standardized and reliable in order to make accurate national and international comparisons of VA data. We also highlight further steps needed in the development of a standard VA process.

Methodological accounts of research interviews find that how researchers use this tool in their work varies widely: there are many ways of interviewing. This edited collection unpacks the interactional dynamics of qualitative research interviews from studies conducted in education, second language acquisition, applied linguistics and disability studies from scholars in the UK, USA, Italy, Portugal and Korea. These studies explore the interactional details of how the identities of researchers and their participants matter for the generation of interview data, as well as the kinds of discursive resources and social actions that occur in tandem with the production of data for research projects. Given the widespread use of qualitative interviews for social research, this book provides a robust contribution to what Tim Rapley has called the social studies of interviewing. This book is relevant to audiences across disciplines who use the interview as a primary research method.

Clinicians will, of course, find the DSM-5® Handbook of the Cultural Formulation Interview indispensable, but administrators, policy makers, advocates, and other practitioners who work collaboratively to engage patients in the mental health care process will also value its clarity and comprehensiveness.

This study evaluates the collection and flow of mortality and cause-of-death (COD) data in Thailand, identifying areas of weakness and presenting potential approaches to improve these statistics. Methods include systems analysis, literature review, and the application of the Health Metrics Network (HMN) self-assessment tool by key stakeholders. We identified two weaknesses underlying incompleteness of death registration and inaccuracy of COD attribution: problems in recording events or certifying deaths, and problems in transferring information from death certificates to death registers. Deaths occurring outside health facilities, representing 65% of all deaths in Thailand, contribute to the inaccuracy of cause-of-death data because they must be certified by village heads with limited knowledge and expertise in cause-of-death attribution. However, problems also exist with in-hospital cause-of-death certification by physicians. Priority should be given to training medical personnel in death certification, review of medical records by health personnel in district hospitals, and use of verbal autopsy techniques for assessing internal consistency. This should be coupled with stronger collaboration with district registrars for the 65% of deaths that occur outside hospitals. Training of physicians and data coders and harmonization of death certificates and registries would improve COD data for the 35% of deaths that take place in hospital. Public awareness of the importance of registering all deaths and the application of registration requirements prior to funerals would also improve coverage, though enforcement would be difficult.

Purpose: To determine the effect on patient responses from the order in which the generic health-related and vision-targeted instruments are administered in a set of randomized clinical trials of intraocular surgery. Patients and methods: Patients who agreed to enroll in the Submacular Surgery Trials (SST) completed baseline quality of life interviews prior to random assignment to surgery or observation. Interviews were conducted by trained interviewers located at the SST Coordinating Center, via a computer-assisted telephone interview system that randomly assigned the order of instrument administration. Either the generic health-related instruments were administered first, the SF-36 Health Survey (SF-36) followed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), followed by the vision-targeted instruments, National Eye Institute-Vision Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ) followed by the SST-Vision Preference Value Scale, or the vision-targeted questions were asked first, followed by the generic health instruments. The four instruments have 25 subscales total. Results: Of the 1015 patients enrolled in the SST, 992 patients had all four instruments administered in random order: 483 (49%) patients responded to the generic instruments first and 509 (51%) patients responded to the vision-targeted instruments first. Order of administration produced significantly different scores for three health status subscales: SF-36 mental health, HADS depression and HADS anxiety (p ≤ 0.05, Wilcoxon rank sum test). Conclusions: Overall, the order of administration did not have a large effect on responses to the baseline interviews in this study. However, three mental health subscales were affected by order, though the order effect was small in magnitude. When the generic health instruments followed the vision-targeted instrument the HADS depression and anxiety scores were higher and the SF-36 mental health scores were lower, both suggesting poorer mental health status. Thus, the order of administration in other settings in which both a generic health-related instrument and a condition-targeted instrument are used may be decided based on individual study goals and priorities but order of administration should be consistent throughout the study.

Developed from years of teaching psychiatry to medical students and residents, this comprehensive text meets a need in the teaching of literature and will be valuable to both students first learning about the MSE and seasoned clinicians seeking an informative reference. The clinical relevance of mental status abnormalities is illustrated through frequent examples of disorders that can cause the particular signs and symptoms defined in each chapter. A final chapter describing fictional case histories with hypothetical examples of written mental status reports will be particularly useful for those learning to write such reports. This text is an important addition to the libraries of students and practitioners who work with psychiatric patients and should help to simplify and organize a challenging task.

Quality assurance and quality control are important for the reliability of case-control studies. Here we describe the procedures used in a previously published study, with emphasis on interviewer variability. To evaluate risk factors for acute pancreatitis, information including previous diagnoses and medication was collected from medical records and by telephone interviews from 462 cases and 1781 controls. Quality assurance procedures included education and training of interviewers and data validity checks. Quality control included a classification test, annual test interviews, expert case validation, and database validation. We found pronounced variations between interviewers. The maximal number of interviews per day varied from 3 to 9. The adjusted average (95% CI) number of diagnoses captured per interview of cases was 4.1 (3.8-4.3) and of controls 3.5 (3.4-3.7) (excluding one deviating interviewer). For drugs, the average (95% CI) number per interview was 3.9 (3.7-4.1) for cases and 3.3 (3.2-3.4) for controls (excluding one deviating interviewer). One of the fourteen interviewers deviated significantly from the others, and more so for controls than for cases. This interviewer's data 'were excluded. Nonetheless, data concerning controls more frequently needed correction and supplementation than for cases. Erroneous coding of diagnoses and medication was also more frequent among controls. Thus, a system for quality control of coding practices is crucial. Variability in interviewers' ability to ascertain information is a possible source of bias in interview-based case-control studies when \"blinding\" cannot be achieved.

Flying in the face of the perceived wisdom that special expertise is required to treat mental health issues in older adults, this guide offers the thoughtful, real-world advice that primary care practitioners, clinical psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, psychiatric residents, and resident fellows need to work effectively with this patient population.

Forensic mental health assessment (FMHA) has grown into a specialization informed by research and professional guidelines. This title presents up-to-date information on the most important and frequently conducted forms of FMHA with regards to evaluation of criminal responsibility, and addresses best approaches to practice for particular types of evaluation for different types of people involved in court proceedings. It provides a thorough discussion of the relevant legal and psychological concepts, followed by a step-by-step description of the assessment process from preparing for the evaluation to writing the report and testifying in court.

Interviews hold a prominent place among the various research methods in the social and behavioral sciences. This book presents a powerful critique of current views and techniques, and proposes a new approach to interviewing. At the heart of Elliot Mishler 's argument is the notion that an interview is a type of discourse, a speech event: it is a joint product, shaped and organized by asking and answering questions. This view may seem self-evident, yet it does not guide most interview research. In the mainstream tradition, the discourse is suppressed. Questions and answers are regarded as analogues to stimuli and responses rather than as forms of speech; questions and the interviewer's behavior are standardized so that all respondents will receive the same \"stimulus\"; respondents' social and personal contexts of meaning are ignored. While many researchers now recognize that context must be taken into account, the question of how to do so effectively has not been resolved. This important book illustrates how to implement practical alternatives to standard interviewing methods. Drawing on current work in sociolinguistics as well as on his own extensive experience conducting interviews, Mishler shows how interviews can be analyzed and interpreted as narrative accounts. He places interviewing in a sociocultural context and examines the effects on respondents of different types of interviewing practice. The respondents themselves, he believes, should be granted a more extensive role as participants and collaborators in the research process. The book is an elegant work of synthesis-clearly and persuasively written, and supported by concrete examples of both standard interviewing and alternative methods. It will be of interest to both scholars and clinicians in all the various fields for which the interview is an essential tool.