Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17913780›Full record

ArticleQuality & safety in health care2007

Outcomes of a quality improvement project integrating mental health into primary care.

Bradley V Watts, Brian Shiner, Andrew Pomerantz, Patricia Stender, William B Weeks

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality & safety in health care, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mental Health Recovery in the Patient-Centered Medical Home.American journal of public health · 2015
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bradley V WattsOutcomes REAP, White River Junction VAMC, White River Junction, Vermont 05009, USA. bradley.v.watts@dartmouth.edu
Brian Shiner
Andrew Pomerantz
Patricia Stender
William B Weeks
White River Junction VA Medical Center · USDartmouth College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDepression is commonly seen, but infrequently adequately treated, in primary care clinics. Improving access to depression care in primary care clinics has improved outcomes in clinical trials; however, these interventions are largely unstudied in clinical settings. This study examined the effectiveness of a quality improvement project improving access to mental healthcare in a large primary care clinic.

methodsA before-after study evaluating the efficacy of the integration of a primary mental healthcare (PMHC) clinic into a large primary care clinic at the White River Junction, Vermont Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC). In the before period (2003), a traditional referral and schedule model was used to access mental healthcare services. Patients who had screened positive for depression using a depression screen for 6 months after entry into either model were retrospectively followed. VA clinics without a PMHC were used as a control. The proportion of patients who received any depression treatment and guideline-adhering depression treatment in each model was compared, as well as the volume of patients seen in mental health clinics and the wait time to be seen by mental health personnel.

results383 and 287 patients screened positive for depression at VAMC and the community-based outreach clinic, respectively. Demographics of the before and after cohorts did not differ. The PMHC model was associated with a greater proportion of patients who had screened positive for depression obtaining some depression treatment (52.3% vs 37.8%; p<0.001), an increase in guideline-adherent depression treatment for depression (11% vs 1%; p<0.001).

conclusionsImplementation of the PMHC model was associated with more rapid and improved treatment for depression in the population of patients who screened positive for depression. More widespread implementation of this model should be investigated.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health Care, IntegratedOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareAgedAppointments and SchedulesDepressive DisorderFemaleGuideline AdherenceHospitals, VeteransHumansMaleMental Health ServicesMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareProgram EvaluationQuality Assurance, Health CareReferral and Consultation

Identifiers

PMID17913780
PMCPMC2464971
OpenAlexW2116698318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.