Credentialing Portfolio – File 2

As part of the portfolio application process, you are required to either

  1. Review 2 journal papers
  2. Provide 2 sample papers you have had published in a peer reviewed journal in the last 3 years
  3. Provide 2 papers critically appraised as part of a formal study programme (e.g. a clinical diploma)

The papers reviewed in all options must have a focus on mental health. If necessary, the candidate may mix and match options 1, 2 and 3 provided a total of 2 papers are submitted or reviewed.

Option 1) Review of journal papers

Please review two journal papers from the following list (please note those in italics are older papers and they are likely to be replaced in time for the autumn  2022 credentialing)

Each critical appraisal should comprise no more than one typed page (A4 size) using the headings recommended by the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) or suitable alternative.

Rosenheck R, Leslie D, Sindelar J et al (2007) Cost-benefit analysis of second generation antipsychotics and placebo in a randomized trial of the treatment of psychosis and aggression in Alzheimer Disease. Archives of General Psychiatry; 64(11): 1259-1268

Simon G, Katon W, Lin E et al (2007) Cost-effectiveness of systematic depression treatment among people with diabetes mellitus. Archives of General Psychiatry; 64(11): 65-72

Barnett A, Millar H, Loze J et al (2009) UK cost-consequence analysis of Aripiprazole in schizophrenia: diabetes and coronary heart disease risk projections (STAR study). European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience; 259: 239-247

Fournier J, DeRubeis R, Hollon S et al (2010) Antidepressant drug effects and depression severity: A patient-level meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association; 303(1): 47-53

Leucht S, Corves C, Arbter D et al (2009) Second-generation versus first generation antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia: a meta-analysis. Lancet; 373: 31-41

Geddes J, Calabrese J, Goodwin G (2009) Lamotrigine for the treatment of bipolar depression: independent meta-analysis and meta-regression of individual patient data from five randomized trials. The British Journal of Psychiatry; 194: 4-9

Geddes J et al (2009) Lithium plus valproate combination therapy versus monotherapy for relapse prevention in bipolar I disorder (BALANCE): a randomized open-label trial. Lancet; 375: 385-395

DeKosky S, Williamson J, Fitzpatrick A et al (2008) Ginkgo bilboba for prevention of Dementia: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association; 300 (19): 2252-2262

Wang C, Xiang Y, Cai Z et al (2010) Risperidone maintenance treatment in schizophrenia: A randomized, controlled trial. The American Journal of Psychiatry; 167: 676-685

Raynsford J, Dada C, Stansfield D, et al (2020).  Impact of a specialist mental health pharmacy team on medicines optimisation in primary care for patients on a severe mental illness register: a pilot study.  European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy; 27:31-35.

Woodward, J., MacKinnon, A. & Keers, R.N (2019). Stakeholders views of medicines administration by pharmacy technicians on mental health inpatient wards. Int J Clin Pharm 41, 1332–1340

Gorton HC, Littlewood D, Lotfallah C, Spreadbury M, Wong KL, Gooding P, et al. (2019) Current and potential contributions of community pharmacy teams to self-harm and suicide prevention: A qualitative interview study. PLoS ONE 14(9):

Kothari, M., Maidment, I., Lyon, R. et al (2016). Medicines reconciliation in comparison with NICE guidelines across secondary care mental health organisations. Int J Clin Pharm 38, 289–295

CASP headings

To assist you with your review(s), please view the CASP web page:

Option 2) Published papers

Please provide 2 sample papers you have had published in a peer reviewed journal in the last 3 years that address some aspect of mental health medicines use. You must be either the sole author or the lead author of the papers. Include a short note (not more than 250 words) outlining the strengths and weaknesses of each paper.

Option 3) Critical appraisal of papers submitted as part of a formal study programme.

Please provide 2 papers including where possible any feedback that was provided.  For each task provide a short note  (not more than 250 words) detailing the nature of the study programme undertaken and outlining the strengths and weaknesses of each submission.

Remember to review the competencies being assessed in this file when collating your evidence: Competencies