Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21221528›Full record

Trial reportDiabetologia2011

Limited effect of screening for depression with written feedback in outpatients with diabetes mellitus: a randomised controlled trial.

F Pouwer, C J Tack, P H L M Geelhoed-Duijvestijn, E Bazelmans, A T Beekman, R J Heine, F J Snoek

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetologia, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Embedding psychological care in diabetes services: Why it's time to innovate and integrate.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Mental health in diabetes care. Time to step up.Frontiers in clinical diabetes and healthcare · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Psychological conditions in adults with diabetes.The American psychologist · 2016
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Diabetes and depression.Current diabetes reports · 2014
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

F PouwerCentre of Research on Psychology in Somatic Diseases, Department of Medical Psychology & Neuropsychology, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE, Tilburg, the Netherlands. f.pouwer@uvt.nl
C J Tack
P H L M Geelhoed-Duijvestijn
E Bazelmans
A T Beekman
R J Heine
F J Snoek

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisThe aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a screening procedure for depression (SCR) vs care as usual (CAU) in outpatients with diabetes. The primary outcome measured was depression score and the secondary outcomes were mental healthcare consumption, diabetes-distress and HbA(1c). MATERIALS AND

methodsIn a multicentre parallel randomised controlled trial, 223 outpatients with diabetes, who had an elevated depression score, were randomly assigned to SCR (n = 116) or CAU (n = 107), using computer generated numbers. SCR-patients were invited for a Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) to diagnose depression and/or anxiety (interviewers were not blinded for group assignment). As part of the intervention, patients and their physicians were informed of the outcome of the CIDI in a letter and provided with treatment advice. At baseline and 6 month follow-up, depression and diabetes-distress were measured using the Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Problem Areas in Diabetes survey (PAID). HbA(1c) levels were obtained from medical charts.

resultsMean CES-D depression scores decreased from baseline to 6 months in both groups (24 ± 8 to 21 ± 8 [CAU] and 26 ± 7 to 22 ± 10 [SCR] respectively [p < 0.001]), with no significant differences between groups. Neither diabetes-distress nor HbA(1c) changed significantly within and between groups. The percentage of patients receiving mental healthcare increased in the SCR group from 20% to 28%, compared with 15% to 18% in the CAU group. CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationDepression screening with written feedback to patient and physician does not improve depression scores and has a limited impact on mental healthcare utilisation, compared with CAU. It appears that more intensive depression management is required to improve depression outcomes in patients with diabetes.

Indexed as

FeedbackWritingAdultAgedDepressionDiabetes MellitusFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOutpatients

Identifiers

PMID21221528
PMCPMC3052512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.