Introduction: The concept of mentalizing is nowadays widely used in research as well as in clinical practice. Despite its popularity, the development of an economic assessment is still challenging. The Mentalization Scale appears to be a promising measurement with good psychometric properties but lacking convergent validity with the Reflective Functioning Scale.Objective: This study aims to test the construct validity of the Mentalization Scale through correlations with the gold standard, the Reflective Functioning Scale, within a clinical sample. Furthermore, it was of interest to replicate its internal consistency.Methods: Twenty-six inpatients of an acute psychiatric ward in Vienna were given the Mentalization Scale (MentS). They were interviewed with the Brief Reflective Function Interview, which was coded with the Reflective Functioning Scale. Correlations and internal consistency were calculated.Results: Concerning the primary aim of this study, the validity was satisfactory for the MentS whole-scale mentalizing as well as for the subscales self- and other-oriented mentalizing. Internal consistency was lower to the findings of the developer and close to the 0.70 threshold.Conclusion: Our findings could foster the psychometric properties of the MentS. Furthermore, the MentS seems to be a promising measurement tool for detecting different dimensions of reflective functioning. Limitations and further research are discussed.
Mentalizing describes the human ability to comprehend one’s own and others’ mental states and is seen as one of the core competencies of psychotherapists. Current research has emphasized the importance of both early dyadic attachment as well as broader sociocultural environmental input on the development of mentalizing. This study investigates whether mentalizing skills, operationalized via reflective functioning (RF), might be influenced by training and working conditions. This study was a matched case-control comparison, cross-sectional study. RF was assessed in a total of 10 psychotherapy trainees working in private practice at the beginning (group A; n = 5) and end (group B; n = 5) of their psychotherapy training (training association: Gestalt Therapy, Institute of Integrative Gestalttherapy Vienna) and in a total of 40 health professionals (institution: General Hospital Vienna—Social Medical Center South, Vienna, Department of Psychiatry, acute psychiatric ward) at the beginning of (group C; n = 20) and without (group D; n = 20) mentalization based therapy training. The participants differed from each other regarding their training, but participants of the same institution were matched. RF scores were significantly higher in group A and B than in group C and D (A,C: p = 0.0065, Odds Ratio (OR): 0.0294; A,D: p = 0.0019, OR: 0.0132; B,C: p = 0.0065, OR: 0.0294, B,D: p = 0.0019, OR: 0.0132). RF scores were not significantly different among groups A and group B (A,B: p > 0.9999) or between groups C and D (C,D: p = 0.6050). The current study suggests that mentalizing skills might be rather slow to improve by training, but that they might be influenced by the context.
BACKGROUND Healthcare professionals need to be prepared to promote healthy lifestyles and care for patients. By focusing on what students should be able to perform one day as clinicians, we can bridge the gap between mere theoretical knowledge and its practical application. Gender aspects in clinical medicine also have to be considered when speaking of personalized medicine and learning curricula. AIM To determine sets of intellectual, personal, social, and emotional abilities that comprise core qualifications in medicine for performing well in anamnesis-taking, in order to identify training needs. METHODS An analysis of training clinicians’ conceptions with respect to optimal medical history taking was performed. The chosen study design also aimed to assess gender effects. Structured interviews with supervising clinicians were carried out in a descriptive study at the Medical University of Vienna. Results were analyzed by conducting a qualitative computer-assisted content analysis of the interviews. Inductive category formation was applied. The main questions posed to the supervisors dealt with (1) Observed competencies of students in medical history taking; and (2) The supervisor’s own conceptions of "ideal medical history taking". RESULTS A total of 33 training clinicians ( n = 33), engaged in supervising medical students according to the MedUni Vienna’s curriculum standards, agreed to be enrolled in the study and met inclusion criteria. The qualitative content analysis revealed the following themes relevant to taking an anamnesis: (1) Knowledge; (2) Soft skills (relationship-building abilities, trust, and attitude); (3) Methodical skills (structuring, precision, and completeness of information gathering); and (4) Environmental/contextual factors (language barrier, time pressure, interruptions). Overall, health care professionals consider empathy and attitude as critical features concerning the quality of medical history taking. When looking at physicians’ theoretical conceptions, more general practitioners and psychiatrists mentioned attitude and empathy in the context of "ideal medical history taking", with a higher percentage of females. With respect to observations of students’ history taking, a positive impact from attitude and empathy was mainly described by male health care professionals, whereas no predominance of specialty was found. Representatives of general medicine and internal medicine, when observing medical students, more often emphasized a negative impact on history taking when students lacked attitude or showed non-empathetic behavior; no gender-specific difference was detected for this finding. CONCLUSION The analysis reveals that for clinicians engaged in medical student education, only a combination of skills, including adequate knowledge and methodical implementations, is supposed to guarantee acceptable performance. This study’s f...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.