ArticlePloS one2015
Health risks and changes in self-efficacy following community health screening of adults with serious mental illnesses.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictors of Weight Loss Among Adults With Mental Illness: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Trial
- The Impact of Student-led Community Health Screenings on Clients' Health Knowledge and Outcomes: A Qualitative Study in New Zealand.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2025Article
- Determinants of timely access to Specialized Mental Health Services and maintenance of a link with primary care: a cross-sectional study.International journal of mental health systems · 2021Article
- The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and daily life of adults with behavioral health disorders.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Indicators for Public Mental Health: A Scoping Review.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Supporting change in chronic disease risk behaviours for people with a mental illness: a qualitative study of the experiences of family carers.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Family carers: A role in addressing chronic disease risk behaviours for people with a mental illness?Preventive medicine reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical health screenings were conducted by researchers and peer wellness specialists for adults attending publicly-funded community mental health programs. A total of 457 adults with serious mental illnesses attended health fairs in 4 U.S. states and were screened for 8 common medical co-morbidities and health risk factors. Also assessed were self-reported health competencies, medical conditions, and health service utilization. Compared to non-institutionalized U.S. adults, markedly higher proportions screened positive for obesity (60%), hypertension (32%), diabetes (14%), smoking (44%), nicotine dependence (62%), alcohol abuse (17%), drug abuse (11%), and coronary heart disease (10%). A lower proportion screened positive for hyperlipidemia (7%). Multivariable random regression analysis found significant pre- to post-screening increases in participants' self-rated abilities for health practices, competence for health maintenance, and health locus of control. Screening identified 82 instances of undiagnosed diabetes, hypertension or hyperlipidemia, and 76 instances where these disorders were treated but uncontrolled. These results are discussed in the context of how this global public health approach holds promise for furthering the goal of integrating health and mental health care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.