Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25805530›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2015

The CORE study protocol: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to test a co-design technique to optimise psychosocial recovery outcomes for people affected by mental illness in the community mental health setting.

Victoria J Palmer, Patty Chondros, Donella Piper, Rosemary Callander, Wayne Weavell, Kali Godbee, Maria Potiriadis, Lauralie Richard, Konstancja Densely, Helen Herrman and 5 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Intensive case management for severe mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Experience-based co-design-Adapting the method for a researcher-initiated study in a multi-site setting.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Co-designing an intervention to improve the process of deprescribing for older people living with frailty in the United Kingdom.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Victoria J PalmerThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Patty ChondrosThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Donella PiperSchool of Health, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, Australia.
Rosemary CallanderCarer Research and Evaluation Unit, Tandem Representing Victorian Mental Health Carers, Abbotsford, Victoria, Australia.
Wayne WeavellConsumer Research and Evaluation Unit, Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council, East Brunswick, Victoria, Australia.
Kali GodbeeThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Maria PotiriadisThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Lauralie RichardThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Konstancja DenselyThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
Helen HerrmanOrygen, The National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health and Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
John FurlerThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
David PierceRural Health Academic Centre, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia.
Tibor SchusterClinical Epidemiology and Biostatics Unit, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Rick IedemaSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Jane GunnThe Department of General Practice, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUser engagement in mental health service design is heralded as integral to health systems quality and performance, but does engagement improve health outcomes? This article describes the CORE study protocol, a novel stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SWCRCT) to improve psychosocial recovery outcomes for people with severe mental illness.

methodsAn SWCRCT with a nested process evaluation will be conducted over nearly 4 years in Victoria, Australia. 11 teams from four mental health service providers will be randomly allocated to one of three dates 9 months apart to start the intervention. The intervention, a modified version of Mental Health Experience Co-Design (MH ECO), will be delivered to 30 service users, 30 carers and 10 staff in each cluster. Outcome data will be collected at baseline (6 months) and at completion of each intervention wave. The primary outcome is improvement in recovery score using the 24-item Revised Recovery Assessment Scale for service users. Secondary outcomes are improvements to user and carer mental health and well-being using the shortened 8-item version of the WHOQOL Quality of Life scale (EUROHIS), changes to staff attitudes using the 19-item Staff Attitudes to Recovery Scale and recovery orientation of services using the 36-item Recovery Self Assessment Scale (provider version). Intervention and usual care periods will be compared using a linear mixed effects model for continuous outcomes and a generalised linear mixed effects model for binary outcomes. Participants will be analysed in the group that the cluster was assigned to at each time point. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Melbourne, Human Research Ethics Committee (1340299.3) and the Federal and State Departments of Health Committees (Project 20/2014) granted ethics approval. Baseline data results will be reported in 2015 and outcomes data in 2017. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12614000457640.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesMental Health ServicesPsychiatryAdultAustraliaCaregiversCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansMental DisordersMental HealthNew ZealandOutcome Assessment, Health CareQuality of LifeResearch DesignSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesPRIMARY CAREPSYCHIATRY

Identifiers

PMID25805530
PMCPMC4386225

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.