What is a good psychiatrist? Professionalism in psychiatry
Research type
Research Study
Full title
What is a good psychiatrist? Qualitative research on professionalism in psychiatry
IRAS ID
177342
Contact name
Clare Trevelyan
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Avon and Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 0 months, 1 days
Research summary
The concept of medical professionalism is receiving increasing scrutiny, in the face of multiple challenges to the social contract that underpins doctors' professional status. A review of the literature reveals no single widely accepted definition of professionalism- the concept is subtle, subjective and complex, making generalisations difficult. Psychiatry involves a unique focus on the doctor- patient relationship, creating a need for specific research into what makes a good psychiatry professional. The Royal College of Psychiatrists define the core attributes of a good psychiatrist as part of “Good Psychiatric Practice” (2009). However there is a lack of UK qualitative studies asking service users as well as doctors what makes a good psychiatrist. Any attempt to describe the professional identity of doctors must acknowledge what is expected of them by those they serve.
This study will explore doctors and service users' lived experiences of “good psychiatry” through in-depth interviews, aiming to uncover the “essence” of a good psychiatrist. 6-12 service user interviews and 6-12 clinician interviews will be conducted. Psychiatry trainees, specialty doctors, consultants and service users will be recruited through purposive sampling. The study will include service users who have had a significant episode of care in the last year, excluding those clinically known to the interviewer, detained or lacking capacity. The interviews will be semi-structured with a topic guide consisting of open questions, with the service users and clinician guides mirroring each other to allow for comparison of data between the groups. The interviews will be recorded on an encrypted recording device and transcribed. Transcripts will be read and re-read, and then coded according to themes identified through this process. Coded data will then be summarised and comparisons made. Findings will help develop understanding of professionalism in mental health services, and ultimately contribute to how psychiatrists are trained and assessed.
REC name
North East - Newcastle & North Tyneside 1 Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/NE/0360
Date of REC Opinion
10 Nov 2017
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion