Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22906179›Full record

Trial reportTrials2012

Collaborative Interventions for Circulation and Depression (COINCIDE): study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of collaborative care for depression in people with diabetes and/or coronary heart disease.

Peter A Coventry, Karina Lovell, Chris Dickens, Peter Bower, Carolyn Chew-Graham, Andrea Cherrington, Charlotte Garrett, Chris J Gibbons, Clare Baguley, Kate Roughley and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Psychological interventions for coronary heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. A (five-)level playing field for mental health conditions?: exploratory analysis of EQ-5D-5L-derived utility values.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

19 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Peter A CoventryGreater Manchester Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care, Institute of Population Health and Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. peter.a.coventry@manchester.ac.uk
Karina Lovell
Chris Dickens
Peter Bower
Carolyn Chew-Graham
Andrea Cherrington
Charlotte Garrett
Chris J Gibbons
Clare Baguley
Kate Roughley
Isabel Adeyemi
Chris Keyworth
Waquas Waheed
Mark Hann
Linda Davies
Farheen Jeeva
Chris Roberts
Sarah Knowles
Linda Gask
University of Manchester · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBLancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust · GBNorth West Ambulance Service NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDepression is up to two to three times as common in people with long-term conditions. It negatively affects medical management of disease and self-care behaviors, and leads to poorer quality of life and high costs in primary care. Screening and treatment of depression is increasingly prioritized, but despite initiatives to improve access and quality of care, depression remains under-detected and under-treated, especially in people with long-term conditions. Collaborative care is known to positively affect the process and outcome of care for people with depression and long-term conditions, but its effectiveness outside the USA is still relatively unknown. Furthermore, collaborative care has yet to be tested in settings that resemble more naturalistic settings that include patient choice and the usual care providers. The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a collaborative-care intervention, for people with depression and diabetes/coronary heart disease in National Health Service (NHS) primary care, in which low-intensity psychological treatment services are delivered by the usual care provider - Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services. The study also aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the intervention over 6 months, and to assess qualitatively the extent to which collaborative care was implemented in the intervention general practices.

methodsThis is a cluster randomized controlled trial of 30 general practices allocated to either collaborative care or usual care. Fifteen patients per practice will be recruited after a screening exercise to detect patients with recognized depression (≥10 on the nine-symptom Patient Health Questionnaire; PHQ-9). Patients in the collaborative-care arm with recognized depression will be offered a choice of evidence-based low-intensity psychological treatments based on cognitive and behavioral approaches. Patients will be case managed by psychological well-being practitioners employed by IAPT in partnership with a practice nurse and/or general practitioner. The primary outcome will be change in depressive symptoms at 6 months on the 90-item Symptoms Checklist (SCL-90). Secondary outcomes include change in health status, self-care behaviors, and self-efficacy. A qualitative process evaluation will be undertaken with patients and health practitioners to gauge the extent to which the collaborative-care model is implemented, and to explore sustainability beyond the clinical trial. DISCUSSION: COINCIDE will assess whether collaborative care can improve patient-centered outcomes, and evaluate access to and quality of care of co-morbid depression of varying intensity in people with diabetes/coronary heart disease. Additionally, by working with usual care providers such as IAPT, and by identifying and evaluating interventions that are effective and appropriate for routine use in the NHS, the COINCIDE trial offers opportunities to address translational gaps between research and implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN80309252 TRIAL STATUS: Open.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsBehavior TherapyCooperative BehaviorCoronary DiseaseDepressionDiabetes MellitusHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient SelectionQualitative ResearchResearch DesignRisk ManagementSample Size

Identifiers

PMID22906179
PMCPMC3519809
OpenAlexW2109100002

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.