Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23076925›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems.

Janine Archer, Peter Bower, Simon Gilbody, Karina Lovell, David Richards, Linda Gask, Chris Dickens, Peter Coventry

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 571 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
571citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
65.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT04601064 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Peer Supported Collaborative Care to Increase Engagement in Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder Care in HIV Care Settings

TypeinterventionalSponsorJohns Hopkins UniversityRan2022 to 2026Enrolled405ConditionsHIV Infections, Substance Use Disorders, Mental Health Disorder, AddictionArmsCollaborative Care Model
NCT05016388 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of the Efficacy of a Multidimensional Collaborative Model to Improve the Resolution of Depression in Primary Care Teams in the Maule Region

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of TalcaRan2021 to 2023Enrolled394ConditionsDepressionArmsCollaborative Multidimensional Model (CMD), Standard Model (SM)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

571 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,054 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Integrated care models for youth mental health: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2024
    Pooled it
  6. Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

511 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Janine ArcherSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. janine.archer@manchester.ac.uk.
Peter Bower
Simon Gilbody
Karina Lovell
David Richards
Linda Gask
Chris Dickens
Peter Coventry
University of Manchester · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBPeninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry · GBSinger (United States) · USUniversity of York · GB

Funding

Department of Health 08/19/04Department of Health 10/57/43Medical Research Council G0701013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommon mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, are estimated to affect up to 15% of the UK population at any one time, and health care systems worldwide need to implement interventions to reduce the impact and burden of these conditions. Collaborative care is a complex intervention based on chronic disease management models that may be effective in the management of these common mental health problems.

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of collaborative care for patients with depression or anxiety. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the following databases to February 2012: The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) trials registers (CCDANCTR-References and CCDANCTR-Studies) which include relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE (1950 to present), EMBASE (1974 to present), PsycINFO (1967 to present) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, all years); the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP); ClinicalTrials.gov; and CINAHL (to November 2010 only). We screened the reference lists of reports of all included studies and published systematic reviews for reports of additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of collaborative care for participants of all ages with depression or anxiety. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent researchers extracted data using a standardised data extraction sheet. Two independent researchers made 'Risk of bias' assessments using criteria from The Cochrane Collaboration. We combined continuous measures of outcome using standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We combined dichotomous measures using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the results. MAIN

resultsWe included seventy-nine RCTs (including 90 relevant comparisons) involving 24,308 participants in the review. Studies varied in terms of risk of bias.The results of primary analyses demonstrated significantly greater improvement in depression outcomes for adults with depression treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.27; RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.43), medium-term (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.15; RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.48), and long-term (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.24; RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.41). However, these significant benefits were not demonstrated into the very long-term (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.27).The results also demonstrated significantly greater improvement in anxiety outcomes for adults with anxiety treated with the collaborative care model in the short-term (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.17; RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.87), medium-term (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.19; RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.69), and long-term (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.06; RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.42). No comparisons examined the effects of the intervention on anxiety outcomes in the very long-term.There was evidence of benefit in secondary outcomes including medication use, mental health quality of life, and patient satisfaction, although there was less evidence of benefit in physical quality of life. AUTHORS'

conclusionsCollaborative care is associated with significant improvement in depression and anxiety outcomes compared with usual care, and represents a useful addition to clinical pathways for adult patients with depression and anxiety.

Indexed as

Interprofessional RelationsAdultAnxietyCase ManagementDepressionFemaleHumansMalePatient Care TeamPrimary Health CarePsychiatric NursingPsychiatryPsychologyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStandard of Care

Identifiers

PMID23076925
PMCPMC11627142
OpenAlexW1603154299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.