Journals / Düşünen Adam - Psikiyatri ve Nörolojik Bilimler Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 2

Assessing clinicians' views: The development of the Bakirkoy Clinician Stance Questionnaire

Pages
189–199
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: BCSQ proves to be a valuable tool for assessing changes in the level of psychological flexibility of clinicians in clinical practice, their attitudes towards psychotherapy/psychopharmacology and their view of psychopathology.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Although there is a wide range of theoretical perspectives and clinical practices, there is no assessment tool that reveals these variations among clinicians.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: Participants included 167 psychiatrists and psychiatry residents from all over Turkey.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: BCSQ proves to be a valuable tool for assessing changes in the level of psychological flexibility of clinicians in clinical practice, their attitudes towards psychotherapy/psychopharmacology and their view of psychopathology.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: Although there is a wide range of theoretical perspectives and clinical practices, there is no assessment tool that reveals these variations among clinicians. In this study, we presented the development process of a new measure for clinicians that assess their psychological flexibility levels, attitudes towards psychotherapy and inclination to the mechanistic approach. Method: Participants included 167 psychiatrists and psychiatry residents from all over Turkey. They completed 29 items intended to form the basis for the Bakirkoy Clinician’s Attitude Questionnaire (BCSQ). Item-total correlation and Cronbach’s alpha correlation analyses were performed to determine internal consistency. The Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II) and the Mental Illness: Clinicians’ Attitude Scale V.4 (MICA v4) were used to assess the convergent and concurrent validity of BCSQ. Results: Principal component analyses with varimax rotation were conducted to ensure construct validity and to explore subdimensions. Finally, a three-dimensional version (Clinical inflexibility, Treatment preference, Mechanistic approach) of the scale with 20 items was created. The BCSQ demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.82) and transient stability. Convergent validity analyses showed that BCSQ subscales have significant relationships with higher psychological inflexibility and stigmatization levels. Conclusion: BCSQ proves to be a valuable tool for assessing changes in the level of psychological flexibility of clinicians in clinical practice, their attitudes towards psychotherapy/psychopharmacology and their view of psychopathology.

🔖

Cite This Article

ULUSOY, S., YAVUZ, K. F., BURHAN, H., NALBANT, A., TERZİOĞLU, M., İLKAY, Ş., ESEN, F. B. (2021). Assessing clinicians' views: The development of the Bakirkoy Clinician Stance Questionnaire. Düşünen Adam - Psikiyatri ve Nörolojik Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 2, 189–199. https://ajindex.com/articles/401645

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Hayes SC, Barnes-Holmes D, Wilson KG. Contextual Behavioral Science: creating a science more adequate to the challenge of the human condition. J Contextual Behav Sci 2012
  2. [CrossRef] 2. Insel T, Cuthbert B, Garvey M, Heinssen R, Pine DS, Quinn K, et al. Research domain criteria (RDoC): toward a new classification framework for research on mental disorders. Am J Psychiatry 2010
  3. [CrossRef] 3. Kupfer DJ, First MB, Regier DA. A research agenda for DSM-V. First ed. Washington, DC, US: American Psychiatric Association, 2002. 4. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). Fourth ed. Washington, DC, US: American Psychiatric Association, 1994. 5. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Fifth ed. Washington, DC, US: American Psychiatric Association, 2013. [CrossRef] 6. World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems (11th Revision). Available from: https://icd.who.int/browse11/l-m/en. Accessed May 22, 2019. 7. Hayes SC, Wilson KG, Gifford E V, Follette VM, Strosahl K. Experiential avoidance and behavioral disorders: a functional dimensional approach to diagnosis and treatment. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996
  4. [CrossRef] 8. Kendell R, Jablensky A. Distinguishing between the validity and utility of psychiatric diagnoses. Am J Psychiatry 2003
  5. Andersson G, Ghaderi A. Overview and analysis of the behaviourist criticism of the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM). Clin Psychol 2006
  6. [CrossRef] 10. Wakefield JC. The DSM’s theory-neutral nosology is scientifically progressive: response to Follette and Houts (1996). J Consult Clin Psychol 1998
  7. [CrossRef] 11. Hayes SC, Follette WC. Can functional analysis provide a substitute for syndromal classification? Behav Assess 1992
  8. Regier DA, Narrow WE, Kuhl EA, Kupfer DJ. The conceptual development of DSM-V. Am J Psychiatry 2009
  9. Kinderman P, Read J, Moncrieff J, Bentall RP. Drop the language of disorder. Evid Based Ment Health 2013
  10. [CrossRef] 14. Biglan A, Hayes SC. Should the behavioral sciences become more pragmatic? the case for functional contextualism in research on human behavior. Appl Prev Psychol 1996
  11. [CrossRef] 15. Moncrieff J. The bitterest pills: the troubling story of antipsychotic drugs. First ed. UK: Palgrav