Should Primary Health Care Professionals* in Primary Care settings provide interim treatment for mental health patients to prevent mental health crisis?

Should primary healthcare professionals in primary care settings provide interim treatment for mental health patients to prevent mental health crisis?
Title page: Full title of professional project indicated. The degree for which the work is submitted omitted. This is used to inform the work completed.
Abstract: Overview of work presented, background provides insight and need for professional project. Note only passive voice to be used in this work (amend throughout this professional project); also, repetition noted towards end of section when discussing use of literature review. Four peer reviewed research articles used to compose literature review equates to limited application of findings/results indicated.
Acknowledgement: noted.
Table of contents: noted.
Introduction: The problem being investigated is indicated effectively, however discussion of why this is necessary and the component parts of the argument justifying its need is superficial; with the structure of this professional project omitted.
Background literature: This chapter requires much great depth to its contextual information to inform the need for this review, also some of discussion presented belongs to the previous chapter. Errors on referencing noted. Useful illustration to aid clarity of discussion, permission for use of Figure 1 (Roberts, 2002) obtained? Interesting observation identified regarding BAME, was this not an area for consideration, iterated from this top-level search? A need to consider delineating of RQ, Aim and outcomes for this review as the two former concepts appear merged, the latter omitted.
Method: A useful introduction to evidence-based practice noted. The typology of literature review needs attention; this may be a systematic approach to reviewing research literature, but it is not a systematic review, please investigate the differences. A limited search criterion presented that requires further exploration and justification of process undertaken indicating decision making. 2.4 presents a useful refinement of data collated, unsure why only 3 databases used to elicit only 94 research articles, resulting in only 4 research articles for critical appraisal in this review. Framework method noted, how did you adapt it for use with variable research methods? Tools employed for crucial appraisal noted, as are themes raised, using what to guide interpretation – Framework method?
Series of thematic sections: Structure to section presented, with verbatim text provided as evidence of themes raised. Comparison of research articles presented in the text to substantiate themes identified.
Discussion and conclusion: Limitations of using refined search criteria and the ability to offer substantive findings recognised; this has ramifications of research reviewed and recommendations proffered for the validity of review undertaken.
References: Errors noted, please see UoN Harvard Guidelines.
Appendices: none.

Leave a Reply