Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21615951›Full record

Trial reportTrials2011

The ACCESS study a Zelen randomised controlled trial of a treatment package including problem solving therapy compared to treatment as usual in people who present to hospital after self-harm: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Simon Hatcher, Cynthia Sharon, Allan House, Sunny Collings, Varsha Parag, Nicola Collins

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Simon HatcherDepartment of Psychological Medicine, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. s.hatcher@auckland.ac.nz
Cynthia Sharon
Allan House
Sunny Collings
Varsha Parag
Nicola Collins
University of Auckland · NZAuckland University of Technology · NZUniversity of Leeds · GBUniversity of Otago · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeople who present to hospital after intentionally harming themselves pose a common and important problem. Previous reviews of interventions have been inconclusive as existing trials have been under powered and done on unrepresentative populations. These reviews have however indicated that problem solving therapy and regular written communications after the self-harm attempt may be an effective treatment. This protocol describes a large pragmatic trial of a package of measures which include problem solving therapy, regular written communication, patient support, cultural assessment, improved access to primary care and a risk management strategy in people who present to hospital after self-harm using a novel design.

methodsWe propose to use a double consent Zelen design where participants are randomised prior to giving consent to enroll a large representative cohort of patients. The main outcome will be hospital attendance following repetition of self-harm, in the 12 months after recruitment with secondary outcomes of self reported self-harm, hopelessness, anxiety, depression, quality of life, social function and hospital use at three months and one year. DISCUSSION: A strength of the study is that it is a pragmatic trial which aims to recruit large numbers and does not exclude people if English is not their first language. A potential limitation is the analysis of the results which is complex and may underestimate any effect if a large number of people refuse their consent in the group randomised to problem solving therapy as they will effectively cross over to the treatment as usual group. However the primary analysis is a true intention to treat analysis of everyone randomised which includes both those who consent and do not consent to participate in the study. This provides information about how the intervention will work in practice in a representative population which is a major advance in this study compared to what has been done before.

trial registrationAustralia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): ACTRN12609000641291.

Indexed as

HospitalizationProblem SolvingResearch DesignAnxietyCommunicationCorrespondence as TopicCultural CharacteristicsDepressionHealth Services AccessibilityHumansNew ZealandPatient Acceptance of Health CarePrimary Health CarePsychiatric Status Rating ScalesQuality of LifeRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID21615951
PMCPMC3117717
OpenAlexW2116830469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.