Trial reportTrials2015
A cluster randomised controlled trial and process evaluation of a training programme for mental health professionals to enhance user involvement in care planning in service users with severe mental health issues (EQUIP): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Collaborative care approaches for people with severe mental illness.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Shared decision-making interventions for people with mental health conditions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Implementing an intervention designed to enhance service user involvement in mental health care planning: a qualitative process evaluation.Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2019Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Article
- Is it time to abandon care planning in mental health services? A qualitative study exploring the views of professionals, service users and carers.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Article
- 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 · 2018Article
- Evaluation of a co-delivered training package for community mental health professionals on service user- and carer-involved care planning.Journal of psychiatric and mental health nursing · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInvolving service users in planning their care is at the centre of policy initiatives to improve mental health care quality in England. Whilst users value care planning and want to be more involved in their own care, there is substantial empirical evidence that the majority of users are not fully involved in the care planning process. Our aim is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of training for mental health professionals in improving user involvement with the care planning processes. METHODS/
designThis is a cluster randomised controlled trial of community mental health teams in NHS Trusts in England allocated either to a training intervention to improve user and carer involvement in care planning or control (no training and care planning as usual). We will evaluate the effectiveness of the training intervention using a mixed design, including a 'cluster cohort' sample, a 'cluster cross-sectional' sample and process evaluation. Service users will be recruited from the caseloads of care co-ordinators. The primary outcome will be change in self-reported involvement in care planning as measured by the validated Health Care Climate Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include involvement in care planning, satisfaction with services, medication side-effects, recovery and hope, mental health symptoms, alliance/engagement, well-being and quality of life. Cost- effectiveness will also be measured. A process evaluation informed by implementation theory will be undertaken to assess the extent to which the training was implemented and to gauge sustainability beyond the time-frame of the trial. DISCUSSION: It is hoped that the trial will generate data to inform mental health care policy and practice on care planning. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16488358 (14 May 2014).
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.